Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Del) 1580

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dhirubhai Naranbhai Patel, Jyoti Singh, JJ.
M/s Mittal Plastic - Appellant
Versus
Commissioner Of Delhi Value Added Tax & Anr. - Respondents
Civil Writ Petition No. 12955 of 2021
Decided On : 22-11-2021

Advocates appeared:
Rahul Gupta, Advocate, Anuj Aggarwal, Advocate, Aishwarya Sharma, Advocate, Ayushi Bansal, Advocate

The court emphasized the need for the concerned respondents to decide the claim of refund and interest in accordance with the applicable legal provisions, rules, regulations, and government policies, and in consideration of the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mafatlal Industries v. Union of India (1997) 5 SCC 536.

Headnote:
Refund - DVAT Act - The court directed the concerned respondents to decide the claim of refund of the petitioner along with the claim for interest at the rate of 6% under Section 42 of the DVAT Act, 2004, in accordance with law, rules, regulations, and government policies applicable to the facts of the case and keeping in mind the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mafatlal Industries v. Union of India (1997) 5 SCC 536.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought a writ of declaration or other directions to issue a refund of a specific amount along with interest, claiming entitlement as per the provision of law.
Finding of the Court:

The court directed the concerned respondents to decide the claim of refund of the petitioner along with the claim for interest at the rate of 6% under Section 42 of the DVAT Act, 2004, in accordance with law, rules, regulations, and government policies applicable to the facts of the case and keeping in mind the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mafatlal Industries v. Union of India (1997) 5 SCC 536, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of the judgment.
Issues: Claim of refund and interest under the DVAT Act, 2004.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for the concerned respondents to decide the claim of refund and interest in accordance with the applicable legal provisions, rules, regulations, and government policies, and in consideration of the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mafatlal Industries v. Union of India (1997) 5 SCC 536.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of with the direction for the concerned respondents to decide the claim of refund and interest within a period of eight weeks from the date of the judgment.

JUDGMENT

D.N. Patel, CJ. - Present writ petition has been preferred seeking the following reliefs:-

"(a) issue a Writ of declaration or any other writ, order or directions directing respondent to the issue the refund of Total Rs.8,71,224/- along with interest from due dates of respective tax period as shown in table at Para 3(b) of the writ petition as petitioner are legally entitled for the same as per the provision of law.

(b) Grant interest @ 6% as per Section 42 of DVAT, Act on Refund claimed amount as petitioner has been unjustifiably denied the refund as the Respondent acted in complete violation of statutory provision and the Circulars issued by Respondent No.-2.

(c) grant exemplary damages cost to petitioner as the respondents had acted in mala-fide and colorable exercise of power in with holding the refunds ignoring the provisions of Section 38(3)(a)(ii) of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004, even not following its own Circulars on the subject and the judgments pronouncement by our own Hon'ble court in the case of Swarn Darshan Impex vs. CTT; 48 DSTC J-317 and M/s True Shine Electronics Pvt. Ltd. vs. CTT; 49 DSTC J-13; or

(d) grant any other relief as deemed fit in the circumstances of the case."

2. We have heard learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and have looked into the facts and circumstances of the case. We hereby direct the concerned Respondents to decide the claim of refund of the Petitioner as stated in the memo of the writ petition for the different assessment years commencing from the year 2011-12, as mentioned in the memo of the writ petition along with the claim for interest at the rate of 6% under Section 42 of the DVAT Act, 2004.

3. The decision shall be taken by the Respondents, in accordance with law, rules, regulations and Government policies applicable to the facts of the case and also keeping in mind the judgment delivered by the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Mafatlal Industries v. Union of India (1997) 5 SCC 536, as early as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from today.

4. With these observations, writ petition is hereby disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document