2015 (5) TMI 839

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eal and it did not specifically assess the reason for delay in filing of the appeal. After the said decision, the provisions of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as "the DVAT Act") were amended by insertion of two provisos to Section 81(2)(a). The second proviso provided, inter alia, that the first proviso - inserted w.e.f. 01.02.2011 would deem to have been in force from 01.04.2005. As a result of this, the Supreme Court in the appeal preferred by Special Leave granted liberty to the Revenue to approach this Court in a review petition. 2. In furtherance of the leave granted, the Revenue filed C.M.Nos 11405-06/2014 seeking review. This review proceeding was ultimately allowed and the delay in the filing of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....emed to have been accepted. It is apparent that the scheme is not left open-ended as submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents and wrongly assumed by the Tribunal. If it is contended that it is left at the whim and fancy of the commissioner to pass an order when he likes, the answer is, what prevents the objector from issuing a notice under section 74(8) of the said Act and thereby fixing a terminal date for passing the order? If the contention is that why should the objector issue such a notice as by virtue of section 35(2) of the said Act he enjoys a virtual stay during the pendency of his objections, the answer is that such an objector would have to choose between the protection of section 35(2) and invoking the deeming provis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the questions of law are decided in favour of the revenue/appellant and against the respondents. While this will not alter the outcome in Behl Construction, as indicated above, it sets right the position in law which the Tribunal had erroneously taken and which was being followed in other cases before the Tribunal." 5. Having heard the submissions of counsel, this Court notices that para 9 of the impugned order of DVAT Tribunal in the Revenue's appeal in the present case (Appeal No. 296-297), inter alia, observed as follows:- "9. We have considered the rival contentions and have also gone through the judgments relied upon by both the parties. Under the peculiar circumstances of the matter, without going into detailed reasoning, we are....