https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396748 Notices and assessment orders issued under section 29(2) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 were held time-barred because, even on the extended limitation assumption, the period expired in November 2017 and the proceedings were initiated only in 2019. The fraud objection did not save the action, as section 29(7) provides the specific mechanism for amendment in cases of fraud, wilful neglect, misrepresentation, or escaped turnover, and no proceeding was shown under that provision. Since the notices were issued under an inapposite provision after limitation had expired, the proceedings were without jurisdiction and fell within the recognised exception to the alternate remedy rule. The notices and assessment orders were set aside, with liberty to proceed in accordance with law if otherwise available. en-us Wed, 19 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Aug 2020 10:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396748 Notices and assessment orders issued under section 29(2) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 were held time-barred because, even on the extended limitation assumption, the period expired in November 2017 and the proceedings were initiated only in 2019. The fraud objection did not save the action, as section 29(7) provides the specific mechanism for amendment in cases of fraud, wilful neglect, misrepresentation, or escaped turnover, and no proceeding was shown under that provision. Since the notices were issued under an inapposite provision after limitation had expired, the proceedings were without jurisdiction and fell within the recognised exception to the alternate remedy rule. The notices and assessment orders were set aside, with liberty to proceed in accordance with law if otherwise available. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 19 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396748