2016 (3) TMI 790 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Court remands case for rectifying defects in declaration form, reassessing penalty. Revenue's revision petition dismissed.

Commercial Taxes Officer, Bhilwara Versus M/s. Shri Prakash Synthetics

The Court remanded the case back to the assessing authority for the Assessee to rectify identified defects in the declaration form, excluding the validity ... Imposition of penalty - Section 76(5) of the Rajasthan VAT Act - Declaration Form VAT-47 used beyond its validity period and certain material particulars were also not filled up - Contention of assessee is that assessing authority at the time of issue did not specify the validity period which was its duty so assessee can not be faulted and punished for the same - Held that:- the case is to be remanded back to the assessing authority for allowing an opportunity to the Assessee to remove the defects, except the question of validity period of the Form VAT-47 in question, because that was obviously, the obligation of the assessing authority in terms of Rule 21(5) of the Rajasthan VAT Rules, 2006, to specify such validity period for the said Form. - Petition remanded back Issues:1. Revision petition under Section 84 of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003 filed by Revenue against the judgment and order passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board.2. Imposition of penalty under Section 76(5) of the Rajasthan VAT Act due to the use of declaration Form VAT-47 beyond its validity period.3. Argument regarding the validity period of the declaration form and the duty of the assessing authority to specify it.4. Disagreement on the grounds for the imposition of penalty and the need for remand back to the assessing authority for further evaluation.Analysis:1. The revision petition was filed by the Revenue against the judgment and order of the Rajasthan Tax Board. The Revenue contended that the matter was similar to a previous decision and relied on specific cases to support their argument.2. The main issue revolved around the imposition of penalty under Section 76(5) of the Rajasthan VAT Act concerning the use of declaration Form VAT-47 beyond its validity period. The Assessee argued that the assessing authority did not specify the validity period, thus relieving them of fault for using the form beyond the specified time.3. The Assessee's counsel highlighted that Rule 21(5) of the Rajasthan VAT Rules, 2006 mandates the assessing authority to specify the validity period on the declaration form. Since this was not done in the present case, the Assessee argued that they should not be penalized for using the form beyond the unspecified validity period.4. The Revenue, in rejoinder, emphasized that besides the validity period issue, certain particulars in the form were not filled, serving as grounds for penalty imposition. They suggested remanding the matter back to the assessing authority for further evaluation based on previous court judgments and interpretations regarding penalties for false or forged documents.In conclusion, the Court decided to remand the case back to the assessing authority for the Assessee to rectify the identified defects in the declaration form, except for the validity period issue. The assessing authority was directed to reevaluate the imposition of penalty based on the remaining defects. The revision petition of the Revenue was disposed of with no costs, and the order was to be shared with the concerned parties and the lower authority promptly.