TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 1048X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in respect of any period. Thus, under the circumstances valid assessment could be framed up to April 30, 2005 as the last date for filing the return in the present case was April 30, 2002. The assessment having been framed on February 18, 2008 was, therefore, clearly beyond limitation as no order extending the limitation had been passed by any competent authority before the expiry of period of limitation. Any subsequent order extending the period of limitation passed by the Commissioner would not clothe the assessing officer with jurisdiction to frame assessment which could be held to be within limitation. The issue stands settled by the decision of this court in Shreyans Industries Limited's case [2008 (8) TMI 806 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he present appeal as narrated therein are that the assessee is a registered dealer and is engaged in the generation and distribution of electricity and the supply of other allied material. The assessee filed the periodical returns for the year 2001-02. On scrutiny, the assessing authority found that the assessee had not paid sales tax on the meter rents charged by it and vide order dated February 18, 2008 raised an additional demand of ₹ 10,08,51,670. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee-dealer filed an appeal. The Excise and Taxation Commissioner (in short, the Commissioner ) vide order dated January 22, 2009 set aside the assessment order dated February 18, 2008 and remanded the matter to the assessing authority for re-examination. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of the assessment year 2001-02 where the return had been filed on April 30, 2002 was within limitation and further that the Commissioner on January 7, 2009 could validly extend the limitation up to March 31, 2009. 6. Section 11(3) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act provides for a period of limitation for framing of assessment whereby the assessing authority can pass an order of assessment within a period of three years from the last date prescribed for furnishing the last return in respect of any period. Thus, under the circumstances valid assessment could be framed up to April 30, 2005 as the last date for filing the return in the present case was April 30, 2002. The assessment having been framed on February 18, 2008 was, therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal and, thus, delay had occurred in filing the present appeal. The said plea does not satisfy the test of sufficient cause envisaged under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The apex court in Oriental Aroma Chemical Industries Limited v. Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation [2010] 5 SCC 459 while laying down the broad principles for adjudicating the issue of condonation of delay, in paras 14 and 15 observed as under: 14. We have considered the respective submissions. The law of limitation is founded on public policy. The Legislature does not prescribe limitation with the object of destroying the rights of the parties but to ensure that they do not resort to dilatory tactics and seek remedy without delay. The idea is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
