Professional Update

(Goods and Service Tax Case laws)

D.B. Civil Writ 11708/2023 (Delhi High Court)

Ashok Leyland Ltd.  

vs

The Commissioner Value Added Tax.

Ratio Decidendi

The Delhi High court held that petitioner is entitled to DVAT refund irrespective of, whether the amount deposited is voluntary or under coercion. Undisputed fact is the amount is lying with DVAT Department, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to refund with interest.  

Facts

Petitioner challenges the rejection of the refund order passed by the Delhi VAT authorities. The petitioner deposited the amount of Rs. 3,50,00,000/- as on 15.03.2013. The petitioner contends that the amount is being deposited by the respondent under coercion that the amount is deposited to meet the target of the revenue for the concern assessment year. The respondent contends that petitioner voluntary deposit the amount contending that the amount is to be set off against future demand and liability. There is no coercion on the part of respondents. Also, the petitioner didn’t apply for refund and has been sleeping over his rights, the refund is barred by limitation.

Issue

Whether the petitioner is entitled for VAT refund.

Held.

The Delhi High Court held that whether the amount deposit with the Department is due to coercion or voluntary deposit, is of little significance. The fact that the respondent has a deposit of Rs. 3,50,00,000 under the name of the petitioner is undisputed.

As would be manifest from a consideration of Section 38 of the DVAT Act, the claim for refund is to be considered in the light of the plain language employed in that provision and principally sub Section (2) thereof which enables the Commissioner to adjust any amount which becomes refundable against tax dues that may exist.

The refund is to be granted with refund u/s 42 of the DVAT act. The refund with interest goes hand in hand.

Accordingly, this Court is of the view that the Additional Director General, Goods and Services Tax Intelligence or Additional Director General, Goods and Services Tax or Additional Director General, Audit and the Deputy/Assistant Director, Goods and Services Tax Intelligence or Deputy/Assistant Director, Goods and Services Tax or Deputy/Assistant Director, Audit are having jurisdiction to issue show cause notices.

 (Disclaimer: The information provided by the author in the article is for general informational purposes only. All information provided is in the good faith, however we make no representation or warranty of any kind, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, adequacy, validity, reliability, availability or completeness of any information in the article.)

CA Manoj Garg

9811275735