Harman Enterprises v. The Commissioner, Excise & Taxation Department, Fatehgarh Sahib
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. Kumar Vishav Aggarwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Amol Rattan Singh, Addl. AG, Punjab, for the respondents. JUDGMENT M.M. KUMAR, J. Learned State counsel has placed on record a copy of the order dated 12.12.2007, showing that provisional assessment under Section 30 of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for brevity, ‘the Act’) has been framed by the Designated Officer-Assistant Excise and Taxation Officer, Sunam, in respect of the period from
13.6.2007 to 30.11.2007 after issuance of notice dated 14.11.2007. The petitioner has put in appearance on 11.12.2007 but he did not turn up on the next date. He has further stated that the goods were seized under Section 46(6) of the Act by the AETC, Sangrur on
20.11.2007. According to the learned State counsel, both the orders C.W.P. No. 18803 of 2007 2 are appealable orders under Section 62 of the Act. A copy of the provisional assessment order dated 12.12.2007 and order seizing the goods, dated 20.11.2007 are taken on record as Mark ‘A’ and ‘B’. In view of the above, we dismiss the writ petition by leaving the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal as provided by Section 62 of the Act. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE December 17, 2007 Pkapoor (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 — s. 30.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 17 Dec 2007. The bench was M M KUMAR, RAKESH KUMAR JAIN.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.