Adarsh Kumar Goel, J. - (1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the asses -see under Section 68 of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the "VAT Act") as well as under Section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 read with Section 68 of the VAT Act impugning the judgment and order dated July 28, 2008 passed by the Punjab Value Added Tax Tribunal, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal").
(2.) THE assessee -company is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as "1948 Act") which stands replaced by the Punjab VAT Act, 2005. The assessment year concerned in the present appeal is 2000 -01. The assessee filed its quarterly return for the said year. The time -limit for completing the assessment is three years from the end of the year under Section 11(3) of the 1948 Act. The said period expired on April 30, 2004 but no assessment was made up to that date. On October 5, 2006 notice for assessment was issued under Section 11(3). The assessee took an objection that the notice was beyond the period of limitation. Thereafter the order granting extension of time was passed on August 17, 2007 by the Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Patiala. Later, assessment was made and demand notice was issued.
(3.) THE assessee preferred an appeal against the extension order dated August 17, 2007 passed under Section 11(10) of the 1948 Act. The Tribunal held that since there was power of extension, the contention that the said power must be exercised within limitation could not be accepted. Reason given for extension of time was that the case of the assessee for the year 1999 -2000 was pending with the Tribunal.;