- (1.) This appeal has been filed by the assessee under section 36 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (in short, "the Act") against the order dated July 31, 2013 (annexure A4) passed by the Haryana Tax Tribunal, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in STA No. 246 of 2008-09, claiming the following substantial question of law: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was justified in not condoning the delay of 155 days wherein there exists sufficient cause for the same?" The facts necessary for adjudication of the present appeal as narrated therein are that the appellant-Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) is a Government of India undertaking engaged in the sale and purchase of petroleum products. In the year 2007, a merger had taken place between the IBP and IOC Limited. Earlier, the IBP was registered as a separate dealer with the assessing authority, Ambala and the present appeal is being filed by the appellant as the IBP had become a part of the appellant. The assessment in this case was framed by the assessing authority vide order dated March 20, 2007 (annexure A1) calculating an excess amount of Rs. 2,42,037 which was carried forward to the next year. Thereafter, the appellant received a notice under section 34 of the Act for initiating revisional proceedings on the ground that the assessing authority had wrongly allowed a concessional rate of tax at four per cent on the sale to industrial units and the stock transfer had not been allowed properly. The appellant submitted reply to the said notice. The revisional authority dropped the notice on the second issue and revised the assessment on the first issue vide order dated July 30, 2011 (annexure A2). Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed an appeal (annexure A3) along with application for condonation of delay of 155 days before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated July 31, 2013 (annexure A4) dismissed the appeal being barred by limitation. Hence, the present appeal.
(2.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
(3.) The primary question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the delay of 155 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal was liable to be condoned in the facts and circumstances of the present case.;