2023 (8) TMI 5

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... : Mr. Rajan Mishra and Mr Vibhav Amonkar, Advocates. For the Respondents : Mr. D. Pangam, Advocate General with Ms Maria Simone Correia, Additional Government Advocate. ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER M.S. SONAK, J.) 1. Heard Mr Rajan Mishra with Mr Vibhav Amonkar for the petitioner. Mr D. Pangam learned Advocate General appears along with Ms Maria Simone Correia for the respondents. 2. Rule. The rul....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er dated 27.04.2017. The CST appeal was filed in the prescribed format but the VAT appeal was not filed in the prescribed format. There is considerable confusion because it appears that the petitioner filed a consolidated appeal on the impugned common order dated 27.04.2017 regarding the CST and VAT assessment. 5. There is no dispute that the appeal if adequately instituted on 12.07.2017, would b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ast the formatted appeal was placed on record on 15.04.2019. However, nothing is on record to show that the appellate authority pointed out this error to the petitioners on 19.03.2019. Still, this does not make a significant difference because the petitioner filed an appeal (though not in the prescribed format ) within limitation. 8. On 11.09.2019, the petitioner was heard by the appellate Author....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sfied that the petitioner had instituted the appeal against the common assessment order (CST and VAT) dated 27.04.2017 and 12.07.2017. This was admittedly within the prescribed period of limitation. However, because of the confusion due to the filing of the consolidated appeal, the VAT appeal may not have been in the prescribed format. Therefore, the VAT appeal in the prescribed format was placed ....