TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (9) TMI 890
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of returns for the tax period 2012-13, is also claimed. 2. The petitioner states that it had made genuine inter-state inward branch transfers for the period 2012-13 against F-Form. These transfers amounted to `1.79 crores but were incorrectly reflected in Annexure 2A filed online with the return for June, 2012 and in Column F11.1.3 of Form DVAT 16. Section 28 of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (hereafter as "DVAT Act") prescribes a time limit for furnishing revised returns i.e. one year from the date end of the Financial Year to which the transactions pertain. The procedure for obtaining F-Forms under the DVAT Act, is through a website which is automated. The details are in terms of Annexure 2A filed online. If inward transfers details....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....petitioner relies upon the judgment of this Court dated 01.02.2016 in Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner, Department of Trade and Taxes (2016) 89 VST 312(Delhi). It is submitted that in that case undoubtedly, the Court was not dealing with C-Forms but, with respect to delay in the claiming of correct credit or concession and the inconsequential nature of the relief on the part of the department, it was held that the request for issuance of form had to be given. 5. The Government of NCT resists the petition stating that the decision in Ingram Micro Pvt. Ltd. (supra) pending consideration before the Supreme Court which has granted special leave to appeal against it. It is stated that Section 26 of the DVAT Act requires a dealer to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of deficiencies Rule: 29 Forms:16, 17 [If a person discovers a discrepancy in a return furnished by him for a tax period under this Act, he shall remove such discrepancy and furnish a revised return within the year following the year of such tax period: PROVIDED that if, as a result of the discrepancy, the person has paid less tax than was due under this Act, he shall, pay the tax owed and interest thereon: PROVIDED FURTHER that for the years 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11, except for those returns pertaining to any tax period of 2010-11, which were scheduled to be furnished in the year 2011-12, the revised return shall be required to be furnished by 31st December, 2012.] 86 Penalties Rule: Nil Form: Nil [(1) In this secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty payable under this sub-section shall not exceed one lakh rupees.] (5) If, a registered dealer fails to comply with the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 21 of this Act, the person shall be liable to pay, by way of penalty, a sum of 1 [five] hundred rupees per day of default subject to a maximum of 2 [ten] thousand rupees. (6) If a registered dealer - (a) fails to comply with the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 22 of this Act; or (b) fails to surrender his certificate of registration as provided in sub-section (7) of section 22 of this Act; the registered dealer shall be liable to pay, by way of penalty, a sum equal to one 3 [thousand] rupees for every day of default subject to a maximum of 4 [twenty five] thousand r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....said documents. As regards the apprehension expressed by Mr. Ghose that this would open a pandora's box and make it difficult for proper administration of collection of taxes by the Respondents, it is trite that each such request for issuance of C-Forms would have to be individually examined on a case to case basis. It is incumbent on the authority while examining such request in light of Rule 5(4) of the CST Delhi Rules to satisfy himself whether any of the grounds spelt out therein is actually attracted. In the present case there is a valid explanation offered regarding the mistake made by it in not including the aforementioned inter- state purchases in the revised returns filed. Also, the authorities appear to be satisfied that these are....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....6(9)(c) facially suggests that if some particulars which should have been disclosed in the return are not disclosed, the tax payer is liable by way of penalty `200 per day from the date falling the due date until the failure is rectified. The respondent's argument that Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd. dealt with C-Forms whereas the claim today is in respect of F-Forms, in the opinion of this Court is without merit. Undoubtedly, while F-Forms relate to the stock available with the dealer, which the petitioner does not dispute was in its knowledge, nevertheless in argument, it is not disputed that the transactions claimed for which examination is sought are not genuine. No doubt, the petitioner might have been aware but its case is that the incor....