Delhi High Court Allows Appeal in Interference in Stay Order of Tax Demand

Must Read

Calcutta High Court Rejects the Petition Challenging the Bid’s Rejection Filed on Seeking Condonation of Delay Due to Pandemic Interventions in Absence of Satisfactory...

Case: Shiba Prosad Banerjee vs The State of West Bengal and others The Hon’ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya of Calcutta...

Calcutta High Court Reiterated the Scope of the Grounds for Exercising Its Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction.

Case: Shreya Beria vs Vedant Bhagat The Calcutta HC on 20th January 2021, dismissed the criminal revision filed by...

Gujarat High Court Allows a Family Suit to Be Transferred From Family Court, Surat to the Family Court, Bhavnagar

The Court directed that in light of the circumstances of the present case, the application of the applicant- wife...

Telangana HC Grants Two Days to Convey the Decision of Appropriate Notification and Counselling to the Higher Secondary Department

Excerpt In Telangana Republican Party Trp vs The State Of Telangana, on 18 January 2021, Telangana High Court directed the...

Telangana HC: Applications Have to Be Made Through Online Web Portal “Dharani” for Mutation of Names

Excerpt In P. Manohar Reddy vs The State Of Telangana And 3 Others, on 18 January 2021, Telangana High Court...

Follow us

On 7th October 2020, a Division Bench of the Delhi HC including Hon’ble Justice Sanjeev Narula and Hon’ble Justice Manmohan heard the case of M/S. Ikea Trading (India) Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Trade and Tax via video conferencing.

By way of this appeal under Section 81 of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004, the Appellant was seeking interference of the Court in respect of the Stay Order passed by the Delhi VAT Appellate Tribunal whereby the Appellant had been directed to deposit 10% of the disputed tax demand and interest along with 5% of the disputed tax involved in the appeal pending before it, for the year 2008-09.

Facts of the Case

The Appellant was engaged in local procurement and export of home furnishing products like carpets, dhurries, fabrics, plastic articles, lamps, soft toys, etc. It was conferred the status of a 4-Star Export House by the Government of India and had obtained registration under the Delhi VAT Act, 2004 to meet its statutory compliances. 

During the disputed period, the Appellant purchased products from several domestic vendors situated outside the State of Delhi against Form H in terms of Section 5(3) and 5(4) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and exported the same to its group companies outside India. All such sales and purchases were outside the tax net in terms of Section 6(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. However, the Value Added Tax Officer (VATO), Export-Import Cell, Department of Trade and Taxes, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, being the Assessing Authority, issued default assessment notices dated 14.09.2012, for tax, interest and penalty for the disputed period.

Contentions of the Appellant

Mr Sahu, learned senior counsel for the Appellant, contended that the Appellant had a strong prima facie case in its favour. He urged that it could be easily demonstrated that the demand raised in the assessment proceedings is wholly misconceived and unsustainable in law. 

Mr Sahu next submitted that the VATO had wrongly imposed on the tax deficiency determined by him. The penalty under taxation law can be imposed only when the assessee has deliberately concealed material particulars to defraud the revenue, which cannot be delineated in the present case.

Mr Sahu contended that since the Appellant had a strong prima facie case and the demanded amount was ex-facie liable to be set-aside in the appeal, insistence on pre-deposit was unjust and inequitable.

Contentions of the Respondent

Mr Ramesh Singh, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, contended that the impugned order was well-reasoned and equitable and called for no interference. He stressed that pre-deposit provisions were to be interpreted strictly based on their wording. He placed reliance on the case of State of Haryana v. Maruti Udyog & Ors, (2000) 7 SCC 348 in support of his argument.

Mr Singh further argued that the proviso in question did not use the terms ‘hardship’ or ‘undue hardship’ caused to the Appellant, which indicated that the merits of the dispute were not relevant. He placed reliance on the case of Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochem Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, 1994 (69) ELT 193 in support of his contention.

He further submitted that even assuming the assessee had a good prima facie case, the same was not a sufficient justification for granting an order of dispensation of pre-deposit, as there was no balance of convenience in favour of the assessee.

Court’s Analysis

The Court referred to ITO v. M.K. Mohammed Kunhi, [1969] 71 ITR 815 (SC), in the context of Income Tax proceedings, which held that the Appellate Tribunal should stay the recovery of tax, where a strong prima facie case is shown. 

The Court opined that if a Tribunal finds that there is a very strong prima facie case made out in its favour should the Tribunal consider whether to grant a stay and dispense with the pre-deposit in terms of Section 76(4) of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 which reads as:

“No appeal against an assessment shall be entertained by the Appellate Tribunal unless the appeal is accompanied by satisfactory proof of the payment of the amount in dispute and any other amount assessed as due from the person”.

The Tribunal should also be mindful of the consequences that would follow from an order that required the Assessee to deposit the whole or part of the demanded amount.

Court’s Decision

The appeal was allowed and the impugned order was set aside. The Tribunal should decide the application under Section 76(4) of the Act afresh after affording the opportunity to both the parties for hearing. The tribunal should also examine the question of the financial hardship of the Appellant.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Calcutta High Court Rejects the Petition Challenging the Bid’s Rejection Filed on Seeking Condonation of Delay Due to Pandemic Interventions in Absence of Satisfactory...

Case: Shiba Prosad Banerjee vs The State of West Bengal and others The Hon’ble Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya of Calcutta High Court on 22nd January...

Calcutta High Court Reiterated the Scope of the Grounds for Exercising Its Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction.

Case: Shreya Beria vs Vedant Bhagat The Calcutta HC on 20th January 2021, dismissed the criminal revision filed by the Petitioners (wife) challenging the...

Calcutta High Court: Deceased’s Wife Has the Sole Right Over His Preserved Sperm; Father Doesn’t Have Any Fundamental Right Over Son’s Progeny Without the...

Case: Asok Kumar Chatterjee vs. The Union of India & Ors. The Calcutta High Court dismissed the petition by the Petitioner (father) on 19th...

Gujarat High Court Allows a Family Suit to Be Transferred From Family Court, Surat to the Family Court, Bhavnagar

The Court directed that in light of the circumstances of the present case, the application of the applicant- wife to transfer the case from...

Telangana HC Grants Two Days to Convey the Decision of Appropriate Notification and Counselling to the Higher Secondary Department

Excerpt In Telangana Republican Party Trp vs The State Of Telangana, on 18 January 2021, Telangana High Court directed the Higher Education Department for passing...

Telangana HC: Applications Have to Be Made Through Online Web Portal “Dharani” for Mutation of Names

Excerpt In P. Manohar Reddy vs The State Of Telangana And 3 Others, on 18 January 2021, Telangana High Court directed that one has to...

Indonesian Spa Therapist Approaches Supreme Court Regarding Illegal Detention Followed by Raid at the Spa

An Indonesian spa therapist has moved to Supreme Court, whilst challenging an HC order which provided relief to the police inspector who was involved in the illegal detention of the spa therapist in a woman’s home which was followed by a police raid at the spa.

Questions of Forgery, Tampering Not Capable of Summary Adjudication Under Article 226 in Delhi High Court’s Jee Marks Case

Questions of fraud, forgery, and tampering require elaborate evidence as per the ruling of the Delhi High Court making it incapable of summary adjudication...

Supreme Court: Urgent and Immediate Reforms Needed in the Legal Education Due To Mushrooming of Law Schools

The Supreme Court, on Saturday, said that there is an urgent need for reforming the legal education in the country as its quality is being affected due to the ‘mushrooming’ of Law Colleges.

Delhi High Court Ruled Disclosure of Interest in Information Sought Under Rti Act Necessary to Establish Bonafides of Applicant

The Delhi HC opined that disclosure of the interest of information is necessary for the information sought under the RTI Act for establishing bonafide...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -