2020 (12) TMI 692 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Request for issuance of Form F has been rejected - rejection on the ground that the dealer did not rectify the error in the returns within the specified time period - issuance of Forms F pertaining to fourth quarter of the year 2015-16 - HELD THAT - This Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending. Consequently, this Court directs the respondent no.1 to allow the amendment sought for by the petitioner in its return of fourth quarter of Year 2015-16. However, this direction shall remain suspended till the Civil Appeals pending before the Supreme Court, taken note of hereinabove, are decided and this direction shall abide by the decision that the Supreme Court renders. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to rejection of Form 'F' issuance request due to error in returns for the fourth quarter of 2015-16.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the rejection of their request for issuance of Form 'F' due to an error in their returns for the fourth quarter of the year 2015-16. The error involved omitting goods worth a specific amount against stock transfer invoices from Bharuch. The petitioner sought permission to amend the revised return to rectify the mistake and enable the issuance of Forms 'F'. However, the request was rejected by the respondent, citing the expiration of the time limit for filing revised returns as the reason. The petitioner argued that conditions should have been prescribed for issuing 'F' forms instead of outright rejection, referring to Rule 8 of CST (Delhi) Rules, 2005.

The petitioner relied on a previous court order in M/s. Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner DT&T & Anr. to support their case. On the other hand, the respondent pointed out that the decision in the mentioned case was under challenge before the Supreme Court. Several similar cases, including M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Commissioner, VAT, were also highlighted, where judgments were appealed against in the Supreme Court, leading to a stay on the operation of the High Court's decisions.

The respondent emphasized that the High Court had issued directions in certain cases for segregated and separate 'C' Forms, but these directions were suspended pending the outcome of civil appeals before the Supreme Court. The counsel for the respondent argued that the High Court had been either adjourning matters or allowing petitions but suspending relief until the civil appeals in the Supreme Court were decided.

After hearing the arguments from both parties, the Court directed the respondent to allow the petitioner to amend their return for the fourth quarter of the year 2015-16. However, this direction was suspended until the Supreme Court decided on the civil appeals related to similar matters. The Court disposed of the present writ petition and pending applications with this direction, emphasizing that the decision would abide by the Supreme Court's ruling. The order was to be uploaded on the website immediately, with a copy forwarded to the counsel through email.