9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (5) TMI 1453 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxFiling of Forms F for the year 2012-13 in respect of its own goods sent to its Bhiwadi factory for job work - HELD THAT - The difficulty faced by the Petitioner is not of its doing. It is a systemic fault that has prevented F Forms being issued to the Petitioner. It was incumbent upon the Department to have facilitated the Petitioner furnishing the relevant details in the online returns filed by it. If there was in fact at the relevant time no column provided which would enable the Petitioner to indicate the dispatch of its own goods to Bhiwadi for job work, it was not open to the Respondents to deny the Petitioner the F forms corresponding to that dispatch of goods. In other words, there is no justification for the Respondents to deny the Petitioner the F forms for the consignment of its own goods sent by it to Bhiwadi for job work. The Respondents are directed now to issue F forms to the Petitioner for the year 2012-13 in relation to its own goods in the value of ₹ 6,59,85,266 sent by it to its Bhiwadi factory for job work - Petition disposed off.
Issues:
Petitioner seeking writ of Mandamus for issuance of Forms 'F' for goods sent to Bhiwadi factory for job work in 2012-13. Analysis: 1. The Petitioner, engaged in manufacturing and sale of writing instruments, sent own goods from Delhi to Bhiwadi for job work. Under Section 6A of the CST Act, transfer of goods by a dealer to another branch or agent, not being a sale, requires a declaration in Form F. Previous judgments affirmed this requirement, obliging the Petitioner to obtain F forms for sending goods to Bhiwadi for job work. 2. Amendments to the DVAT 16 form were made in 2013, introducing columns for own goods received/transferred after job work against F forms. However, for the period prior to 2013, the Petitioner had no provision to indicate the value of own goods received back after job work in Bhiwadi. 3. Despite the Petitioner's efforts to obtain F forms post-assessment, the Department faced systemic issues in providing the forms, leading to discrepancies in data upload and denial of forms. The Petitioner diligently pursued the matter with the Department, highlighting the lack of columns in previous returns for indicating job work details. 4. The Respondents acknowledged the Petitioner's situation, attributing the issue to system faults and agreeing on the need for rectification. The Respondents failed to offer a solution, and objections on limitation were deemed inapplicable given the Petitioner's continuous pursuit with the Department. 5. The Court found the Petitioner not at fault for the systemic issues hindering F form issuance. It held the Department responsible for facilitating the Petitioner in providing necessary details in returns. Consequently, the Court directed the Respondents to issue F forms for the concerned goods sent to Bhiwadi for job work in 2012-13 within two weeks. 6. The judgment concluded with the disposal of the petition, emphasizing the Respondents' obligation to issue the F forms promptly.
|
