9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (1) TMI 858 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxDirection to the Respondent No.1 to issue Form C - Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 - year 2016-17 - Respondent contends that this Court has recently in similar matters been either adjourning matters or is allowing the petition but suspending the relief till the civil appeals pending in the Supreme Court are decided - HELD THAT - This Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending. Consequently, it directs Respondent No. 1 to allow the Petitioner to amend in its return of Third Quarter for the Financial Year 2016-17 (01.10.2016 to 31.12.2016) and issue segregated and separate Form C in terms of the prayer Clause-(i) to the writ petition (subject to verification of entitlement on merits and not on the ground of limitation). 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.
Issues:
Seeking direction for issuance of "Form C" under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for the year 2016-17. Analysis: The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a direction for the issuance of "Form C" under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for the year 2016-17. The petitioner had filed quarterly returns in Form DVAT 16, along with Form 2A and Form 2B, providing details of purchases and sales as per the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004. It was highlighted that due to an inadvertent error, the total inter-state purchases were incorrectly reflected in the TIN Number of Fossil India Pvt. Ltd., Himachal Pradesh, instead of being bifurcated between Fossil India, Himachal Pradesh, and Fossil India, Bangalore Branch. Despite the correct recording of purchases, the petitioner was unable to download Form C online due to the system's limitations. The petitioner's transactions were not in question, and the issue arose from the system's inadequacies. The petitioner emphasized that relief had been granted in similar cases by the court, citing precedents to support the claim. The respondent, represented by the Additional Standing Counsel, argued that previous decisions of the court in similar cases were under challenge before the Supreme Court, with interim orders suspending certain directions issued by the High Court. The respondent pointed out that the High Court had issued directions for segregated Form C issuance in a related case, but those directions were suspended pending the Supreme Court's decision. The respondent highlighted various cases where similar issues were being addressed by the court, either through adjournments or by granting relief subject to the outcome of pending civil appeals before the Supreme Court. Considering the circumstances and the pendency of related matters before the Supreme Court, the High Court directed the respondent to allow the petitioner to amend its return for the Third Quarter of the Financial Year 2016-17 and issue segregated and separate Form C. However, this direction was subject to verification of entitlement on merits and not on the ground of limitation. The High Court suspended the implementation of this direction until the Supreme Court decided the pending Civil Appeals related to similar issues. The court disposed of the writ petition with this directive, acknowledging the ongoing legal proceedings and the need to await the Supreme Court's decisions on related matters.
|
