2014 (1) TMI 1618

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... VAT Appeal No.102 of 2013 has been preferred by the assessee under Section 36 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (in short, "the Act") against the order dated 8.7.2013, Annexure A.5 passed by the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Haryana, Chandigarh (in short, "the Tribunal") in STA No.174 of 2011-12, claiming following substantial questions of law:- "A. Whether the Commissioner in revision enjoys the supervisory jurisdiction to examine the order passed by the Assessing Officer to the extent whether the order passed by the Taxing Authority is correct or not? B. Whether the Commissioner in exercise of his power will either confirm the order or set aside the order and pass an assessment order if the Commissioner is satisfied that order ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....xation Commissioner cum revisional authority have the power of revision for the orders passed under HVAT Act 2003 by the Assessing authority? H. Whether the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner was competent enough to pass order under Section 34(1) of the Act whereas he himself is enjoying the power of assessing authority? I. Whether an officer enjoying the powers of assessing authority and revisional authority and district head can examine the order passed by assessing authority? J. Whether the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner cum reversional authority was under obligation to confront the new material based on which he has changed the opinion? K. Whether consistency has to be maintained for assessment of different yea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing jurisdiction holding that the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner had jurisdiction to pass the order under section 34(1) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee is before this court through the present appeals. 4. The primary issue that arises for consideration is that whether the revisional power was properly conferred on the DETC or not. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the Act came into operation on 1.4.2003 whereas notification Annexure A.6 was issued by the State Government on 31.3.2003 whereby under sub section (2) of section 34 of the Act, power had been conferred on various authorities to exercise revisional jurisdiction. According to the learned counsel, once the Act came into operation with effec....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....case may be:- Provided further that no order shall be revised after the expiry of a period of three years from the date of the supply of the copy of such order to the assessee except where the order is revised as a result of retrospective change in law or on the basis of a decision of the Tribunal in a similar case or on the basis of law declared by the High Court or the Supreme Court. (2) The State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, confer on any officer not below the rank of Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, the power of the Commissioner under subsection (1) to be exercised subject to such exceptions, conditions and restrictions as may be specified in the notification and where an officer on whom such po....