9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 448X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dvocate-General Punjab, for the appellant. G. R. Sethi and Varun Chadha for the respondent. JUDGMENT This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue under section 68(2) of the Punjab VATAct, 2005 (in short, "the Act") against the order dated March 1, 2013, annexure A1 passed by the VAT Tribunal, Punjab, (in short, "the Tribunal") for the assessment year 1997 98, claiming following substantial que ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mill and is engaged in the manufacture of sugar and by-products from sugarcane. Assessment for the year 1997-98 was framed by the Assessing Authority vide order dated August 22, 2003, annexure A3, creating an additional demand of Rs. 22,72,798. Not satisfied with the order, the respondent-assessee filed an appeal before the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals), Patiala Division, Patia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TC 57 (P&H); [2004] 24 PHT 183 (P&H) held that the assessment was barred by limitation and that the assessing authority did not have the jurisdiction to frame assessment. Consequently the appeal was allowed. Hence the present appeal by the Revenue. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. The point that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty on July 4, 2002, i.e., after expiry of three years, the assessee received another notice for appearance and finalisation of the assessment. The notice which was received by the assessee on July 4, 2002 was challenged before this court wherein it was observed that when the return was filed, there was no limitation of three years for finalisation of assessment. By virtue of Ordinance dated March ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Ordinance. The facts of the instant case being similar to Emkay Industries' case [2005] 139 STC 57 (P&H) ; [2004] 24 PHT 183 (P&H), the assessment was required to be finalised within three years. In the present case, the assessment order was required to be passed by April 30, 2001, whereas the same has been passed on August 22, 2003. Thus, there can be no escape from the finding that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
