Court directs release of 'C' Forms for FY 2012-13 purchases, pending Supreme Court decision.

The court directed respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to release 'C' Forms to respondent No.5 for purchases made during the FY 2012-13. However, this direction was suspended until the pending Civil Appeals before the Supreme Court were decided, and the direction would abide by the Supreme Court's decision. The petition was disposed of in these terms.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Issuance of 'C' Forms by the Department of Trade and Taxes, GNCTD.
2. Acceptance of 'C' and 'E1' Forms for the FY 2012-13.
3. Restraint against coercive steps including levy of penalty, interest, and differential tax.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Issuance of 'C' Forms by the Department of Trade and Taxes, GNCTD:
The petitioner sought a mandamus directing the Department of Trade and Taxes, GNCTD (respondent No.1) to issue 'C' Forms to Delhi Transco Limited (respondent No.5) for purchases made during the financial year 2012-13. The contracts between the petitioner and respondent No.5 included provisions for the issuance of requisite sales tax declaration forms by the employer (respondent No.5). Despite completion of the contracts and issuance of completion certificates, respondent No.5 failed to provide 'C' Forms for certain supplies, leading to additional tax liabilities for the petitioner. Respondent No.5 admitted its failure in applying for the 'C' Forms in a communication dated 23.02.2018, stating that the forms were not issued due to non-inclusion in 'C' Form Return for the respective financial years inadvertently.

2. Acceptance of 'C' and 'E1' Forms for the FY 2012-13:
The petitioner also sought directions for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to accept 'C' and 'E1' Forms for the FY 2012-13 and make assessments accordingly to grant a refund. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 argued that the 'C' Forms were not issued due to non-inclusion of particulars of the purchases in the returns filed by respondent No.5 for the relevant period. They cited Section 28 of the DVAT Act, which allows correction of discrepancies in returns within one year following the year of the tax period. The respondents contended that the statutory period of one year for revising returns under Section 28 of the DVAT Act also applies to returns filed under the CST Act, and respondent No.5 cannot seek rectification or revision of its returns for the year 2012-13 at this belated stage.

3. Restraint against coercive steps including levy of penalty, interest, and differential tax:
The petitioner sought restraint against respondent Nos. 3 and 4 from taking coercive steps, including the levy of penalty, interest, and payment of differential tax. The court acknowledged the petitioner's grievance that it was suffering due to respondent No.5's failure to disclose relevant transactions in their returns and not applying for 'C' Forms within time. However, the court held that respondent No.5, though an undertaking of the GNCTD, is an assessee under the law and is bound by the same legal discipline as any other entity. The court concluded that the petitioner could not seek a direction to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to issue 'C' Forms for the FY 2012-13 after over four years when the transactions were not disclosed in the returns filed by respondent No.5, and no rectification was sought within the period of limitation.

Conclusion:
The court directed respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to release 'C' Forms to respondent No.5 for purchases made during the FY 2012-13. However, this direction was suspended until the pending Civil Appeals before the Supreme Court were decided, and the direction would abide by the Supreme Court's decision. The petition was disposed of in these terms.

---