JUDGMENT

Ritu Bahri, J. (Oral)

This judgment shall dispose of VATAP Nos.105 of 2018 and 210 of 2018 together as common questions of law and facts are involved in both the appeals. For reference, facts are being extracted from VATAP No.105 of 2018.

2. The instant appeals, under Section 36 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 for the assessment year 2002-2003, is against the order dated 09.10.2017 (Annexure A-4) passed by the Haryana Tax Tribunal, Chandigarh, rejecting the appeal of the appellant against the order dated 26.05.2008 (Annexure A-2) passed by the Commissioner (I)-cum-Revising Authority, Sirsa (H.Q. at Hisar).

3. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant was registered under the HARYANA GENERAL SALES TAX ACT with the Department of Sales Tax and also under the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003, as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Assessment under Section 28 of the HARYANA GENERAL SALES TAX ACT , 1973 for the assessment year 2002-2003 was framed by the Assessing Authority, Sirsa, vide order dated 19.03.2007 (Annexure A-1). Thereafter, the Revisional Authority, Hisar, vide order dated 26.05.2008 (Annexure A-2) rejected the submissions made by the appellant. The said order has been affirmed by the Tribunal vide order dated 09.10.2017 (Annexure A-4). Hence, the present appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that assessment for the year 2002-2003 was framed by the Assessing Authority vide order dated 19.03.2007 (Annexure A-1). The Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, while exercising the powers of the Revisional Authority under the Haryana Value Added Tax assumed powers under the HARYANA GENERAL SALES TAX ACT , 1973 and issued notice for revision, which is beyond jurisdiction. As per Section 61 (1) of the Repeal and Saving clause, only certain proceedings were saved by way of Section 61 (2), which were pending at the commencement of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003. In this case, after passing of the assessment order dated 19.03.2007 (Annexure A-1), no proceedings were pending under the HARYANA GENERAL SALES TAX ACT , 1973 and hence, the revisional powers could not be exercised by the respondent-authorities under Section 61 (2) of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The Repealing and Saving clause is reproduced as under:-

"Repeal and Saving.

61 (1) The Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 (20 of 1973) is hereby repealed:

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1),-

(a) any application, appeal, revision or other proceedings made or preferred to any authority under the said Act, and pending at the commencement of this Act, shall, after such commencement, be transferred to and disposed of by the officer or authority who would have had jurisdiction to entertain such application, appeal, revision or other proceedings under this Act as if it had been in force on the date on which such application, appeal, revision or other proceedings was made or preferred."

5. Learned counsel for the appellant has referred to the judgment passed by this Court in Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Haryana v. M/s Frigoglass India Private Limited and another, VATAP No.130 of 2017 (decided on 13.05.2019). In that judgment, this Court was considering the provisions of Section 61 (1) and 61 (2) of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003. In para nos. 17, 18 and 19, it was observed as under:-

"17. From the above legal position, it emerges in nut shell, the effect of sub-section (1) of Section 61 of the HVAT Act is that substantive provisions of the HGST Act shall be treated to be in existence for the purposes of action which had been