Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. - (1.) This appeal has been filed by the dealer under Sec. 68 of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (in short "the Act") against the order dated 1.10.2015 (Annexure A -3) passed by the Punjab Value Added Tax Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in Appeal No. 209 of 2015, claiming the following substantial question of law: - - "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, both the authorities below were justified in dismissing the appeals of the appellant by holding the condition of pre deposit of 25% as mandatory for the entertainment of appeal -
(2.) A few facts relevant for the disposal of the present appeal as narrated therein may be noticed. The appellant is a dealer having TIN No. 03171154793 and is engaged in the trading of non -ferrous metal at Ludhiana. It had filed its quarterly and annual returns for the assessment year 2011 -12 after claiming the ITC. A notice was issued to the appellant by the Excise and Taxation Officer. The assessment was framed for the assessment year 2011 -12 vide order dated 16.9.2014 (Annexure A -1) by creating an additional demand of Rs. 1,14,47,560/ -. Feeling aggrieved by the assessment order, Annexure A -1, the appellant filed an appeal before the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals), who vide order dated 2.2.2015 (Annexure A -2) dismissed the appeal for non -deposit of 25% of the additional demand under Sec. 62(5) of the Act. Still dissatisfied, the appellant filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 1.10.2015 (Annexure A -3) upheld the order of the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals) and dismissed the appeal. Thereafter, the appellant filed CWP No. 330 of 2016 which was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 8.1.2016 (Annexure A -4). Hence, the present appeal.
(3.) Notice of motion.;