TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (8) TMI 877
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ional Advocate-General, Punjab, The judgment of the court was delivered by ADARSH KUMAR GOEL J.--Delay condoned. Heard on merits. 2. This petition has been filed under section 68(1) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (in short, "the Act") against the order of the Tribunal constituted under the said Act. 3. The petitioner is a registered dealer. During the assessment year 2003-0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1948 Act") reopened the assessment and held that turnover pertained to the purchases made by the petitioner from M/s. Kamakhya at Chandigarh and thus, turnover did not relate to second sale in the State of Punjab. On that basis, demand for additional tax was raised. The revision filed by the petitioner before the Tribunal having failed, this petition has been filed. 4. We have heard learned....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or transportation of goods at Mohali, octroi receipts and copies of declarations at the ICC. The stand of the petitioner is that the tax had already been paid and first sale in the State of Punjab had already taken place, the questions posed by the Tribunal did not arise at all. In spite of the submission of the petitioner, the petitioner was not given opportunity to lead evidence on the relevant ....