2020 (3) TMI 9

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nces of the case, the Tribunal is correct in holding that the petitioner is not entitled to the claim of deemed assessment under Section 11-E of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 read with Rule 33-B of the Punjab General Sales Tax Rules, 1949 and notification dated 9.7.1999 when the substantive appeals on merits were pending before the Deputy Excise & Taxation Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala against order dated 29.7.1994 passed by the Assessing Authority, Ludhiana ? 2) Whether the Tribunal has properly interpreted Rule 33-B of the Punjab General Sales Tax Rules, 1949 and the notification dated 9.7.1999 in view of the fact that it is well settled that the appeal is in continuance of the original suit and assessment as h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....T] Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, if the State Government is satisfied that it is necessary and expedient so to do in public interest, it may by notification in the Official Gazette, direct that assessment in respect of any class of dealers, for any prescribed period, shall be deemed to have been made by the concerned assessing authorities as per their returns already furnished, on such date, on payment of such amount and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed. Notification dated 9.7.1999 In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 27 read with Section 11E of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (Punjab Act 46 of 1948), and all other powers enabling him in this behalf, the Governor o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....elp in the present case. What is to be considered is whether the case of the dealer falls within Rule 1(2) of the Punjab General Sales Tax (fifth Amendment) Rules, 1949. As per the Rule quoted above, the same shall apply to cases in which assessment is pending upto year 1994-95 and shall include even the cases in which the assessment proceedings had been initiated. From a plain reading of the Rule, it is evident that it does not cover the cases where the assessment has been finalised. In the case of the petitioner, the assessment order was passed in 1996 whereas the notification was dated 9.7.1999. Merely that the appeal was pending will not make the case of the petitioner eligible under the Rules. The reliance upon the decision of th....