2016 (1) TMI 91

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....facts are involved therein. For brevity, the facts are being taken from VATAP No. 233 of 2014. 3. VATAP No. 233 of 2014 has been filed by the assessee under Section 68 of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (in short "the Act") against the orders dated 27.2.2012 (Annexure A-3) and dated 24.8.2012 (Annexure A-4) passed by the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Punjab (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") claiming the following substantial questions of law:- a) Whether the impugned orders passed by the ld. below authorities without taking into account the material submissions and against the statutory provisions of law is legally sustainable in the eyes of law? b) Whether the act on the part of the ld. below authorities to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ure A-1). Aggrieved with the said order dated 20.11.2009, creating additional demand of Rs. 26,20,799/-, the appellant filed an appeal before the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals), Ludhiana, but remained unsuccessful and thus, preferred second appeal before the Tribunal, who too dismissed its appeal vide order dated 27.2.2012 (Annexure A- 3). Thereafter, the application of the appellant for rectification of the aforesaid order dated 27.2.2012 (Annexure A-3) dismissing its appeal, was also rejected vide order dated 24.8.2012 (Annexure A-4) by the Tribunal. Still dissatisfied, the appellant has preferred the present appeal along with an application for condonation of delay of 192 days in filing the present appeal. 5. We ....