TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 1045
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Appeal and framed following two substantial questions of law for determination:- (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. Tribunal was justified in rejecting the claim of the appellant in view of Section 15A even though it does not bar the refund in case of generation of bye products while manufacturing taxable goods ? (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the Ld. Revisional Authority on the interpretation of Section 15A even though the appellant had paid voluntary tax for the Assessment Years 1998-99 and 1999-2000 which was required to be refunded." 3. However, he submits that in view of the subsequent pronouncement by the Full Ben....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on the ground that the Revisional Authority had no powers to pass the impugned order interpreting Section 15-A of the Act of 1973 even the voluntary tax for the assessment years 1998-1999 and 1999-2000 have been paid voluntarily and it was required to be refunded. Thus, the interpretation made by the Revisional Authority, being non-est, deserves to be set aside. 7. We have considered the submissions. 8. Section 36 (4) of the new Act of 2003 read as under:- "36. Appeal to High Court (1) XXXXXX (2) XXXXXX (3) XXXXXx (4) The appeal shall be heard only on the question so formulated and the respondents shall, at the hearing of the Appeal, be allowed to argue that the case does not involve such question: PROVIDED that nothing in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s a different intention from the earlier Act. The enquiry would necessitate an examination if the old rights and liabilities are kept alive or whether the new Act manifests an intention to do away with or destroy them. If the new Act manifests a different intention, the application of the General Clauses Act will stand excluded. 9. There were no proceedings pending against the respondent under the Act of 1973 when the new Act came into force on 1-4-2003. The suo-moto revisional power under Section 40 of the former Act was exercised on 7-6-2004. The repeal and saving clause in Section 61 of the 2003 Act, saved only pending proceedings under the repealed Act. The intendment clearly was that matters which stood closed under the 1973 Act had ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ia Ltd. (supra) at para 73 are to the same effect. 11. The legislature, in its wisdom having noticed the limitation and constraints under Section 61 of the 2003 Act, made necessary amendments to the same by Act No. 3 of 2010 on 2-4-2010. Any interpretation saving the revisional power under Section 40 of the Act of 1973, without any proceedings pending on the relevant date, by resort to Section 4 of the Punjab General Clause Act, 1858 would render the amendment redundant, and an exercise in futility, something which the legislature never intended to do. Such an incongruous interpretation leading to absurdity has to be avoided." 9. In the case in hand, it is undisputed fact on record that notice for revision of the order of assessment was....