2024 (8) TMI 836

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(2024) 129 GSTR 544, (2024) 21 Centax 182 (Gau.), 2024:GAU - AS:7506 - DB<br>GAUHATI HIGH COURT - HC (Judgement / Order / Decisions)<br>Dated:- 5-8-2024<br>WP(C)/2863/2022, WP(C)/4170/2021, WP(C)/5107/2021, WP(C)/4173/2021, WP(C)/7167/2023, WP(C)/4166/2021, WP(C)/495/2022, WP(C)/4327/2021, WP(C)/4151/2021, WP(C)/489/2022, WP(C)/4168/2021, WP(C)/4085/2021, WP(C)/7236/2021, WP(C)/4100/2021 - -<br>GST<br>HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM For the Petitioner(s) : Dr. A. Saraf, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. P.K. Bora, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S.C. Keyal, Standing Counsel, CGST., Mr. B. Gogoi, Standing Counsel, Finance Department, Govt. of Assam. National Plasto Moulding, M/s.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., wherein it was categorically held that a purchasing dealer cannot be punished for the act of the selling dealer in case the selling dealer had failed to deposit the tax collected by it. 2. It is submitted that the Delhi High Court has observed that the provisions of Section 9 (2) (g) of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 can be read down and the demand raised against the purchasing dealers, who have entered into bona fide transaction, cannot be sustained. It is also submitted that the Special Leave Appeal against the said judgment of the Delhi High Court has already been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 10.01.2018 vide Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 36750/2017. 3. Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, CGST an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fide purchasing dealer, it will become vulnerable to invalidation on the touchstone of article 14 of the Constitution. 40. ....... 41. The court respectfully concurs with the above analysis and holds that in the present case, the purchasing dealer is being asked to do the impossible, i.e., to anticipate the selling dealer who will not deposit with the Government the tax collected by him from those purchasing dealer and therefore avoid transacting with such selling dealers. Alternatively, what section 9 (2) (g) of the DVAT Act requires the purchasing dealer to do is that after transacting with the selling dealer, somehow ensure that the selling dealer does in fact deposit the tax collected from the purchasing dealer and if ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....able to come across material to show that the purchasing dealer and the selling dealer acted in collusion then the Department can proceed under section 40A of the DVAT Act." 6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has dismissed the SLP preferred against the said judgment by passing the following order:- "On hearing learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the petitioner, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The special leave petition is dismissed. Learned Additional Solicitor General, however, submits that a batch of petitions were decided by the impugned order and there are some of the cases where the purchase transactions are not bona fide like the present case and those cases ought to have been re....