9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1426X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 018 (O&M) - - X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal has erred in ignoring the limitation of five years available under Section 28 of the HGST Act, 1973 for the purpose of proceeding with the assessment? ii) Whether the learned Tribunal has erred in adopting a contradictory stand vis-a-vis its earlier position in HM Mehra & Co. Sonepat vs. State of Haryana case as well as by this Hon'ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the appeals ranging from 62 days to 245 days for which no satisfactory explanation has been given by the learned State counsel. 4. It was fairly admitted by learned counsel for the State that the issue involved herein stands concluded by the decision of this Court in VATAP No.130-2017 titled as "Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Haryana vs. M/s. Frigoglass India Pvt. Ltd. and anr" decided on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e HVAT Act. The period of revision of five years provided under HGST Act for revision shall stand extended to eight years in certain eventualities. Further, HVAT Act would not affect the concluded actions or the assessments etc. In other words, in so far as assessment finalized for assessment years prior to coming into force of HVAT Act, the limitation under the HGST Act would be applicable. Howev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ars for best judgment assessments from the close of the year to which the assessment relates. The HVAT Act came into force on 1.4.2003 and thus, the limitation period of three years was to be computed from that date for all assessment years prior to 1.4.2003 as in the present cases. Consequently, the limitation period for the assessment in the present cases ended on 31.3.2006 whereas the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
