9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1315X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of the Excise & Taxation Officer-cum-Notified Authority as upheld by the Deputy Excise & Taxation Commissioner (Appeals) Patiala imposing penalty under Section 53, under Section 60 and levying interest under Section 32(1) of the Punjab VAT Act? - Held that: - There is no justification for levy of penalty for the period recovery of tax remained stayed by this Court - petition allowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judgment of this Hon'ble Court which is still a matter under challenge before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and wherein leave has been granted? (iii) Whether in the facts and in the circumstances the order levying purchase tax u/s 19 of the Punjab VAT Act, 2005 and not allowing correctly ITC on the said purchase tax without assigning reason is correct in law in view of the various p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Section 32(1) of the Punjab VAT Act?" Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that question No.(i) is formal. Questions No.(ii) and (iv) do not arise in the present appeal as the issue has already been settled by this Court vide judgment dated 15.07.2015 passed in VATAP No.176 of 2013 titled as M/s AB Sugars Ltd. Vs. State of Punjab & anr., against the assessee. As far as question No.(i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as M/s The Morinder Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. State of Punjab & anr. In that petition, vires of provisions of Punjab VAT Act, 2005 were under challenge. While admitting that writ petition on 31.01.2006, this Court had restrained the respondents from taking coercive steps for recovery of tax demand. The writ petition was dismissed on 20.01.2010, vide main judgment in CWP No.9019 of 2005 tit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
