Case Law Details
SRF Limited Vs Commissioner of VAT (Delhi High Court)
Petitioner approached DVAT Department, Delhi vide letter dated 22-04-2018 to seek permission to amend the revised return so as to enable it to download Forms F for the Quarter ending 31-03-2016. He points out that October, 2019 was written by the petitioner, the impugned order was passed wherein it was stated that the time limit to file the revised return had already expired and that Petitioner cannot be permitted to revise the returns.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that submitted that Respondent No. 1 ought to have prescribed conditions to issue of ‘F’ forms to the Petitioner-Company in terms of Rule 8 of CST (Delhi) Rules, 2005 instead of rejecting the request of the Petitioner Company.
Satyakam contends that this Court has recently in similar matters been either adjourning matters or is allowing the petition but suspending the relief till the civil appeals pending in the Supreme Court are decided.
Having heard the counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending. Consequently, this Court directs the respondent no.1 to allow the amendment sought for by the petitioner in its return of fourth quarter of Year 2015-16. However, this direction shall remain suspended till the Civil Appeals pending before the Supreme Court, taken note of hereinabove, are decided and this direction shall abide by the decision that the Supreme Court renders.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
