Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2008 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (10) TMI 609 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxWhether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order (A-9) passed by the Tribunal in rectification proceedings on September 6, 2007, was beyond the scope of rectification jurisdiction under section 21A(2) of the PGST Act, 1948 and therefore without jurisdiction, hence liable to be set aside? Whether the impugned order, annexure A-9, is beyond the prescribed period of limitation of two years, given in section 21A(2) of the Act and therefore without jurisdiction and, hence liable to be quashed? Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was bound to adjudicate all the issues raised in original appeal which were not decided by the Tribunal while passing the original order? Whether the order passed by the Assessing Authority is barred by limitation as prescribed under section 11(3) as amended by notification dated March 3, 1998? Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the original order of assessment was time-barred even under the unamended ection 11(4) of the PGST Act, as no notice of best judgment assessment was ever given to the assessee before passing any order? Held that:- In view of the settled legal position, we are of the view that the assessment was not barred by limitation. In Murlidhar Mahabir Parshad [1967 (4) TMI 169 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] the honourable Supreme Court held that if notice of assessment had already been given, the assessment was to be treated to be within limitation. In the present case, notice of assessment was prior to the enforcement of amending law. The order of the Tribunal dated July 8, 2005, thus, suffered from error apparent on the face of record, which could be rectified.Accordingly, question No. (i) is decided against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. For Question No. (ii) as the order of rectification was passed on September 6, 2007, while original order of the Tribunal was dated July 8, 2005 and thus, order of rectification was beyond limitation. In favour of assessee. If the order of the Tribunal holding the assessment to be barred by limitation was to be set aside, the Tribunal was bound to adjudicate on all issues in the original appeal. However, in view of our answer to question No. (ii), all the other questions has become academic.
|