TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (7) TMI 867
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he delay in filing the appeals, and those appeals have been fixed for hearing on merits. In these appeals, the appellant has challenged the aforesaid order on the ground that the Tribunal has entertained the second appeals, filed by the department, as the earlier appeals, filed by the department, were dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated November 23, 2007, without any liberty to file fresh appeals on the same cause of action. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that there is no provision under the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") to file any supplementary appeal or a second appeal against the same order. In the present case, vide a common order dated November 27, 2006, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er sanction order. The petitioner also raised objection that under the provision of the Act, the appellate authority cannot permit withdrawal of an appeal with a liberty to file fresh one after removal of the defects in the sanction order. The Tribunal, vide the common order dated February 29, 2008, has rejected the objections raised by the petitioner and after condoning the delay in filing the appeals, entertained the appeals, filed by the department. Against the said order, the instant appeals have been filed. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that once the appeals, filed by the department without the sanction order, had been dismissed as withdrawn by the Tribunal, the second appeals filed by the department were not maintainab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sion to file fresh case could be said to be impliedly granted in withdrawal order. In this regard, reference can be made to a Division Bench decision of the Orissa High Court in Hari Basudev v. State of Orissa AIR 2000 Orissa 125. Earlier, the appeals were filed within limitation and fresh appeals were also filed just within 30 days of the withdrawal of the earlier appeals. Therefore, while filing the fresh appeals, applications for condonation of delay were filed and the Tribunal, by taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, condoned the delay and entertained those appeals. We do not find any illegality in entertaining those appeals. The contention of learned counsel for the appellant that since the earlier appea....