9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 1108X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 21/08/2023 passed by the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal at Ahmedabad (for short 'the Tribunal) whereby the second Restoration Application No. 12 of 2023 filed by the petitioner to restore the Restoration Application No. 1 of 2023 in Second Appeal No. 1172 of 2018 is rejected by the Tribunal. 3. Learned advocate Mr. Hasit Dave for the petitioners submitted that he could not remain present during the course of hearing of Second Appeal No. 1172 of 2018 as well as Restoration Application No. 1 of 2023 filed by the petitioner as explained in Restoration Application No. 12 of 2023 preferred by the petitioner to restore Restoration Application No. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ising out of the order on dated 06-07-2018 in the first appeal passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner of the commercial tax (appeal 6) Vadodara - where by the audit assessment order passed on dated 09-06-2017 by the learned Assistant Commissioner of the Commercial Tax (I), Unit 57, Ankleshwar under section: 34 (2) of the Value Added Tax Act, 2003 read with section: 9 (2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for the Period of 01/04/2012 to 31/03/2013. The First Appeal was disallowed." 6. It was submitted that the Tribunal should have allowed the restoration application by restoring Restoration Application No. 1 of 2023 to restore Second Appeal No. 1172 of 2018 on imposition of cost and the impugned order should not have been passed on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts of the case, it appears that the Tribunal ought not to have rejected the Restoration Application No. 12 of 2023 on the ground that the matter is pending for ten years and the applicant has not paid any amount towards tax demand. The Tribunal should have considered the facts of the case to grant the relief to the petitioners for benefit of production of Form-F in accordance with law so as to grant relief during the course of hearing of Second Appeal No. 1172 of 2018. The matter is pending before the Tribunal prior to 2018 and still pending for adjudication and therefore, the Tribunal should not have dismissed the restoration application on that ground of pendency of the litigation. 10. We therefore allow this petition by imposing a c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
