1990 (12) TMI 312 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
- Issuance of form "F" under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.

Detailed Analysis:
The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Central Sales Tax Act, sought the issuance of form "F" from the respondents. The petitioner receives goods on transfer from a principal outside Delhi and is required to furnish form "F" under section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act, issued under rule 4C of the Central Sales Tax (Delhi) Rules, 1957. The petitioner had applied for the forms, but only 9 out of 34 requested forms were issued. The dispute arose regarding the balance 25 forms requested by the petitioner.

The respondents contended that the petitioner had made local sales against fake S.T. 1 form, leading to outstanding local sales tax. However, the court noted that there was no provision empowering the sales tax authority to refuse the issuance of "F" forms under the Central Sales Tax Act. The court emphasized the distinction between the Central Sales Tax Act and the Delhi Sales Tax Act, stating that officers under the Delhi Sales Tax Act cannot use provisions of the latter to pass orders related to the Central Sales Tax Act.

Upon examining section 6A and rule 4C, the court found no power for the respondents to refuse issuing the forms. While the assessing officer can request security under certain circumstances, no such request was made in this case. The court observed a delay of over 11 months in processing the petitioner's application for forms, indicating possible vindictive action by the Sales Tax Officer. The court concluded that the petitioner should have been provided with all 34 forms requested, as there was no valid reason to withhold the balance 25 forms.

Consequently, the court allowed the writ petition, issuing a writ of mandamus to the respondents to furnish the petitioner with the remaining 25 "F" forms within one week. The court specified that the forms should be filled by the petitioner in the office of the Sales Tax Officer, clarifying that the forms cannot be refused due to the petitioner's failure to provide security.

In summary, the judgment addressed the issuance of form "F" under the Central Sales Tax Act, emphasizing the lack of authority for the respondents to withhold the forms without valid grounds. The court directed the respondents to provide the petitioner with the remaining forms requested, highlighting the importance of adhering to statutory provisions and preventing misuse of authority by tax officials.