2007 (8) TMI 654 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues: Application for fresh certificate of registration under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 not submitted within the specified time limit leading to cancellation of registration.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, failed to submit an application for obtaining a fresh certificate of registration under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 within the stipulated time frame. The impugned order cancelling the Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) assigned to the petitioner was challenged through a writ petition. The key contention revolved around the consequences of failing to meet the application deadline set by the new Act. The petitioner claimed to have sent an application before the deadline via ordinary post, which was disputed by the respondents who asserted they did not receive any such application.

The court examined Section 88(2) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, which stated that a registered dealer under the previous Act would continue to be so until a fresh certificate of registration was granted under the new Act. The Act itself did not specify the repercussions of not applying for the new certificate within the designated time frame. The court highlighted Rule 4(8) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Rules, 2007, which mandated registered dealers to file an application in a specific format before the specified deadline. It was noted that the time limit for application submission was set by subordinate legislation and not the statute, and neither the Act nor the subordinate legislation outlined the consequences of failing to apply within the stipulated time frame.

Consequently, the court held that the impugned order cancelling the registration should not have been issued solely based on the petitioner's failure to submit the application within the specified time. The writ petition was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the petitioner was directed to submit an application within one week. Upon receipt of the application, the first respondent was instructed to apply the provisions of Section 88(2) of the Act and take appropriate actions. The connected miscellaneous petitions were closed, and no costs were awarded in this matter.