TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 1026X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... force, the authorities could not issue the said notice, as the jurisdiction to issue such notice has not been saved in the saving clause under Section 61 (2) of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003. Hence, by applying the ratio of the aforesaid judgment on the facts of the present case, the impugned orders are held to be without jurisdiction. Since the assessment order was passed under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, no proceedings could be initiated after coming into force the Haryana VAT Act, as has been done in the present case - Apart from that, as per the judgment passed in M/s Frigoglass India Private Limited s case, the proceedings for the assessment year 2002-2003 had to be completed within a period of three years. However, the assessment order itself has been passed on 19.03.2007 (Annexure A-1). Appeal allowed. - VATAP No.105 of 2018 (O&M) & VATAP No.210 of 2018 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 17-1-2023 - HON BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI AND HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: For the Appellant : Mr. Rajiv Agnihotri, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Mamta Singla Talwar, DAG, Haryana. **** Ritu Bahri, J. (oral) This judgment sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nding anything contained in sub-section (1),- (a) any application, appeal, revision or other proceedings made or preferred to any authority under the said Act, and pending at the commencement of this Act, shall, after such commencement, be transferred to and disposed of by the officer or authority who would have had jurisdiction to entertain such application, appeal, revision or other proceedings under this Act as if it had been in force on the date on which such application, appeal, revision or other proceedings was made or preferred. Learned counsel for the appellant has referred to the judgment passed by this Court in Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Haryana vs. M/s Frigoglass India Private Limited and another, VATAP No.130 of 2017 (decided on 13.05.2019). In that judgment, this Court was considering the provisions of Section 61 (1) and 61 (2) of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003. In para nos. 17, 18 and 19, it was observed as under:- 17. From the above legal position, it emerges in nut shell, the effect of subsection (1) of Section 61 of the HVAT Act is that substantive provisions of the HGST Act shall be treated to be in existence for the purposes of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eedings including appeals and revision pending under the HGST Act at the commencement of the HVAT Act were to be disposed of by the corresponding authority under the HVAT Act. In the instant cases, the assessment proceedings in question under the HGST Act were pending when the HVAT Act came into force and therefore under the HVAT Act, limitation period prescribed under Section 15 of the HVAT Act became applicable to the said assessment proceedings. The new law of HVAT Act regarding limitation being procedural law also otherwise became applicable to the proceedings pending under the HGST Act. In this view, we are supported by the cases of Allied Exports Imports (supra), Balarpur Industries Limited (supra) and the Patiala Cooperative Sugar Mills Limited (supra). According to section 15(4) of the HVAT Act, limitation period for finalizing best judgment assessment is three years. The HVAT Act came into force on 1.4.2003 and therefore the said limitation period of the years is to be computed from that date for all assessment years prior to 1.4.2003 as in the instant cases. Consequently the limitation period for the assessment in the instant cases ended on 31.3.2006. However, the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary intendment, no retrospective effect is sought to be given, the effect of repeal of the HGST Act is required to be examined with reference to Section 4 of the Punjab General Clauses Act, 1898 which contemplates that in the absence of any contrary intention expressly or impliedly, any right, privilege, liability or obligation under the old law will continue to be governed under the old law. In Mahabir Techno Limited s case (supra), the notices issued under Section 40 of the HGST Act for certain assessment years for suo moto revision of assessment were challenged. The plea taken by the petitioner was that the language in Section 40 of the said Act suggests that no order shall be revised after the expiry of period of five years from the date of the order. Learned counsel for the State submitted that the matter had been remitted back by the Apex Court to consider the issue as to whether the period as provided under the Act was the outer limit for conclusion of revisional proceedings or for initiation thereof. After examining the relevant statutory provision and the case law on the point, it was held by this Court that in case of failure on the part of the assessee to file return or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
