9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 1022X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le was communicated by the Commissioner to the Petitioner on 3rd June, 2014, i.e., after the amendment came into effect. This was pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 5th May, 2014 in the earlier writ petitions. While the DT&T is right that at the time when the special audit took placed Section 58A (4) of the DVAT Act had not been amended, the fact remains that the fees payable to the Petitioner was determined after the amendment came into force. It is precisely for dealing with a situation where a professional chartered accountant may be left high and dry by a defaulting dealer whose accounts have been specially audited, that Section 58A (4) of the DVAT Act was amended. The Court sees no reason why the benefit of this amendme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Chartered Accountants ( CAs ) seeking directions to the Department of Trade and Taxes ( DT T ) to honour the bills raised by the Petitioner for the work of special audit done by it under Section 58A of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 ( DVAT Act ) pursuant to specific directions of the Commissioner of Trade Taxes, Respondent No.1 herein. 2. The facts which are not in dispute are that the Petitioner was entrusted with the work of conducting the special audit of different dealers registered under the DVAT Act. The special audit work was entrusted by the Commissioner under Section 58 A (1) of the DVAT Act. According to the Petitioner, the remuneration for the work was to be in terms of the norms fixed by the Institute of Chartered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ates at which the fees are claimed do not accord with the applicable instructions which have prescribed limits for fees payable for a special audit. It is submitted that the amounts claimed are based upon the rates prescribed by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India. Counsels for the assessees supported the submission of the Commissioner and further argued that in these cases the determination of the fees has not been made in any known manner. Section 58(a)(iv) prescribes that the expenses incidental to the audit of records under Section 58(a)(i) including the remuneration of the Accountant etc. shall be determined and paid by the dealer and that determination shall be final . Concededly, there has been no determination as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s as determined by the Commissioner, VAT. 6. At the outset Mr. Lalwani sought to urge that even in the other four matters where the payment has been received by the Petitioner, it was not in terms of the norms fixed by the ICAI. This contention was raised even earlier by the Petitioner in the writ petitions which were disposed of by the order dated 5th May 2014. Clearly that submission did not find favour with this Court and the Commissioner was asked to determine the fees to be paid. Therefore, at this stage it is not open for the Petitioner to contend that it should be paid at the ICAI rates. 7. It was urged by Mr. Gautam Narayan, learned counsel appearing for the DT T that these writ petitions are barred by laches and in any even ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under sub section (1) (including the remuneration of the accountant or a panel of accountants or professional or panel of professionals) shall be paid by the dealer as determined by the Commissioner and that determination shall be final and default in such payment shall be recoverable from the dealer as tax and in the manner provided for the recovery of arrears of tax under this Act. 10. Section 58 A (4) after its amendment of 28th March 2013 with effect from 18th June 2012 reads as under: 58A (4) The expenses of, and incidental to, the examination and audit of records under sub section (1) (including the remuneration of the accountant or a panel of accountants or professional or panel of professionals) shall be determined and pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Value Added Tax Inspector gave a report to the Assistant Commissioner that the dealers in question had closed shop and were not traceable. Mr. Narayan submits that the efforts to recover the fees from the dealers concerned will be continued and as and when the fees is recovered it will be paid to the Petitioner. 13. In the present case the determination of the fees payable was communicated by the Commissioner to the Petitioner on 3rd June, 2014, i.e., after the amendment came into effect. This was pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 5th May, 2014 in the earlier writ petitions. While the DT T is right that at the time when the special audit took placed Section 58A (4) of the DVAT Act had not been amended, the fact remains tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
