MANU/DE/3626/2024

True Court CopyTM

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI

W.P. (C) 11463/2023

Decided On: 27.05.2024

Appellants: Rashtriya Transport Corporation Vs. Respondent: Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Service Tax and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Sanjeev Sachdeva and Ravinder Dudeja

JUDGMENT

Ravinder Dudeja, J.

1. The Petitioner has preferred this petition seeking the following reliefs:-

i) issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, thereby quashing impugned order dated 31.07.2023, where in interest has been provided from the date of decision of Tribunal upto date of passing order of sanctioning refund;

ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction in the nature thereof, thereby directing the respondents to issue and pay interest on Rs. 10,32,192/-to the Petitioner @ 15% from 27.04.2006 to 09.08.2023 when the amount has been sanctioned and credited to the account of the Petitioner.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

2. From the facts on which there is no dispute and which so stand disclosed in the writ petition, it would appear that Petitioner was engaged in the business of transporting goods. A survey was conducted at the godowns of the Petitioner by the Officers of the Department on 09.03.2006. A notice was issued calling upon the relevant records stated therein. Default Assessments were framed on 23.03.2006 imposing tax of Rs. 4,91,096/-and penalty under section 86 (19) and under Section 86 (14) amounting to Rs. 4,91,096/-and Rs. 50,000/-respectively.

3. The assessment was challenged before Objections Hearing Authority ["OHA"] which was rejected vide order dated 20.04.2006. After the said order, Petitioner deposited disputed amount of tax penalty vide challans dated 27.04.2006.

4. Being aggrieved, Petitioner preferred appeals before the Delhi Value Added Tax ["DVAT"] Appellate Tribunal but the same were partially allowed, whereby, only the penalty imposed under Section 86 (19) was set aside.

5. Petitioner preferred VAT Appeal before this Court. Vide order dated 27.03.2023, the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for deciding afresh.

6. Accordingly, the appeals were reconsidered and decided in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 10.05.2023, whereby, assessments framed by Assessing Authority and the order passed by OHA were set aside.

7. Petitioner preferred Writ Petition (C) No. 8667/2023 before this Court seeking refund of the amount deposited with interest and the same was disposed of vide order dated 03.07.2023, directing the Respondents to decide the claim of petitioner within four weeks. Vide Sanction Order dated 03.07.2023, the entire deposited amount was refunded along with interest of Rs. 10,322/-calculated from the date of order of the Appellate Tribunal i.e. 10.05.2023 at the rate of 6% per annum.

8. Challenging the order dated 03.07.2023, petitioner again approached this Court in W.P. (C) 9409/2023 and this Court vide order dated 18.07.2023, set aside the order dated 03.07.2023 and directed the Authority to reconsider the issue of interest and pass a speaking order thereto.

9. After hearing the Petitioner, Respondents passed a speaking order dated 31.07.2023, rejecting the contentions of the petitioner of higher rate of interest than that mentioned in the Delhi Value Added Tax ["DVAT"] Act as also grant of interest from the date of deposit. The interest on the penalty imposed under Section 86 (19) of Rs. 4,91,096/-was calculated from 26.08.2021 i.e. the date of order by which the said penalty was set aside by the learned Tribunal, while the interest on the tax and penalty under Section 86 (14) was calculated from 10.05.2023.

Submissions:-

10. Learne........