Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Punjab And Another vs M/S Anapurna Impex Pvt. Ltd on 20 April, 2011
Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel, Ajay Kumar Mittal
VAT Appeal No. 25 of 2011 -1-
****
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
VAT Appeal No. 25 of 2011
Date of decision: 20.4.2011
State of Punjab and another ...Appellants
Versus
M/s Anapurna Impex Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL
Present: Mr. Amol Rattan Singh, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab
for the appellants.
****
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J (Oral).
1. This Appeal has been filed under Section 68(2) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 against the order dated 22.7.2010 Annexure P-5 passed by the VAT Tribunal proposing following substantial questions of law:-
"i) Whether the order passed by Ld. Tribunal is sustainable in law?
ii) Whether the order passed by the Tribunal by relying upon judgment of this Hon'ble High Court in the case of M/s Shreyans Industries Ltd. which has already been challenged before Hon'ble Apex Court is sustainable in law?
iii) Whether the Tribunal has rightly allowed the appeal of the respondent when the Commissioner had exercised the power in accordance with Section 11(10) of the Act, VAT Appeal No. 25 of 2011 -2- **** 1948 before the expiry of the period of limitation as the returns were filed on 5.4.2005?
iv) Whether the provisions of Section 11(3) is directory in nature especially when the legislature has empowered the Commissioner to extend the period of limitation by exercising power under Section 11(10) of the Act, 1948?
v) Whether the Tribunal should not have entertained the appeal without deposit of 25% of the amount of additional demand (1997) 10 PHT-1?
vi) Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to set aside assessment order itself when issue before it was only with regard to the deposit of 25% of the additional demand?
2. The assessment under the provisions of Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 for the assessment year 2003-04 in respect of the assessee became time barred under Section 11 of the Act. Though extension of time was granted, it was after the expiry of the statutory period. The assessee challenged the same and the Tribunal has set aside the assessment with the following observations:-
"As per section 11(5) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 even if the dealer does not furnish returns in respect of any period by the last date prescribed, the Assessing Authority has to frame the assessment within the period of 3 years from the last date prescribed for furnishing the last return in respect of such period and pass an order of assessment to the best of his judgment.
In view of provisions of section 11(5) of the Act, the VAT Appeal No. 25 of 2011 -3- **** assessment had still to be framed within the period of 3 years from the last date for filing the return i.e.30.3.2004 and should have been completed by 30.4.2007, even if the return was not filed.
Order dated 5.12.2007 of the commissioner exercising powers u/s 11(10) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 extending the period of limitation for framing assessment in case of the appellant for the assessment year 2003-04 had separately been set aside vide Tribunal order dated 23.10.2008 in Appeal (VAT) No.91 of 2008-09. Under these circumstances, the assessment framed on 15.4.2008 being beyond the prescribed period of limitation is not in accordance with law and is liable to be set aside."
3. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant.
4. It is not disputed that the view taken by the Tribunal is consistent with the view expressed by this Court in Shreyans Industries Limited Vs. State of Punjab and others (2008) 18 VAT and Service Tax Cases 493 (P&H).
5. Since the view taken by the Tribunal is consistent with the view taken by this Court in Shreyans Industries Limited, no substantial question of law arises. The appeal is dismissed.
(Adarsh Kumar Goel)
Judge
April 20,2011 (Ajay Kumar Mittal)
Pka Judge