2020 (11) TMI 662 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of impugned notice of default assessment of tax and interest and the impugned notice of default assessment of penalty - Section 137 of the Delhi Land Reform Act, 1954 - assessment years 2012-13, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 - DVAT Act - HELD THAT - Since the demands and penalties are the basis on which the impugned writ of demand dated 29th September, 2020 has been issued, this Court is of the view that petitioner must challenge the demands and penalties in accordance with the statutory mechanism. At this stage, Mr. Rajesh Mahna, learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner shall withdraw the present writ petition and challenge the demands and penalties in accordance with the DVAT Act. The statement made by Mr. Rajesh Mahna is accepted by this Court and the petitioner is held bound by the same. To facilitate the filing of the said proceedings, the writ of demand dated 29th September, 2020 is stayed for a period of six weeks.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to writ of demand, quashing of default assessment of tax, interest, and penalty under DVAT Act for multiple assessment years.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged a writ of demand dated 29th September 2020, seeking to quash the default assessment of tax, interest, and penalty under the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 for the assessment years 2012-13, 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-17. The petitioner contended that the impugned demand was based on doubts raised by the respondent regarding purchases made from selling dealers, despite the petitioner having made purchases from registered dealers with proper tax invoices, citing a previous judgment in support of their claim.

During the proceedings, it was revealed that the assessment orders forming the basis of the impugned writ of demand were unsigned and passed without notice to the petitioner. The court requested clarification from the respondent regarding the uploading of assessment orders on the DVAT portal. The respondent provided a detailed chart showing assessment order numbers, dates, tax periods, assessment years, and total amounts due for tax and interest for each period in question.

The respondent confirmed that all demands and penalties mentioned were available on the dealer login and ward incharge login, with the order date in the chart representing the assessment order date reflected in the respective logins. The court emphasized the need for the petitioner to challenge the demands and penalties through the statutory mechanism provided by the DVAT Act.

Subsequently, the petitioner's counsel expressed the intention to withdraw the writ petition and challenge the demands and penalties as per the DVAT Act. The court accepted this statement, holding the petitioner bound by it. The court stayed the writ of demand dated 29th September 2020 for six weeks to allow for the filing of the necessary proceedings, with all rights and contentions of the parties left open. The court directed the immediate uploading of the order on the website and forwarding a copy to the petitioner's counsel via email, thereby disposing of the present writ petition and pending applications.