Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Manuals Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Samsung India Electronics Private Limited Versus Government of NCT of Delhi & Others

2016 (4) TMI 273 - DELHI HIGH COURT

Period of limitation - Demand notices of default assessment of tax and interest - Section 32 of the DVAT Act, 2004 - Petitioner sold IT related TFT/LCD/LED Monitors by charging VAT at 4% or 5% although the said item is not covered under the Third Schedule to the DVAT Act. Pursuant to the receipt of the assessment and penalty notices, the Petitioner sent a letter dated 24th April 2014 to the VATO stating, that no show cause notice was issued to them asking why LCD/LED/TFT Monitors should not be t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y the requirements of the Act or for any reason the return filed is not satisfactory then the Commissioner will ‘reassess’ to the best of his judgment the amount of net tax due for the tax period. - Section 34 of the DVAT Act spells out the maximum period within either an assessment or, where the circumstances so warrant, a reassessment under Section 32 of the DVAT Act can be made. The outer limit for either is four years from “the end of the year comprising of one or more tax period for wh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nt Year 2009-10 ought to have been issued before the expiry of the respective dates as shown in the above table. Barring the reopening of the assessments for February and March 2010, where the dates of the notices of default assessment were prior to the completion of four years, i.e., 26th March and 23rd April 2014, in respect of all other returns by way of self-assessment made by the Petitioner from April 2009 to January 2010, the re-opening of the assessment was sought to be done on a date aft .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

four years for completion of the reassessment. Therefore, the Court is satisfied that barring the default notices of assessment pertaining to the months of February and March 2010, all the other notices of default assessment issued for the remaining months of AY 2009-10 by the impugned notices dated 31st March 2014 are barred by limitation and deserve to be set aside. - Another ground on which the default notices of assessment require to be quashed is the photocopy of the original signed ord .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

at the determination by the Commissioner in the case of NEC under Section 84 of the DVAT Act was not binding on the present Petitioner as it was not a party to those proceedings. In the present case the DT&T has not been able to persuade the Court that LCD/LED/TFT monitors sold by the petitioner during the period under consideration is not classifiable as ‘Monitors’ under Item 3 below Entry 41A of the Third Schedule to the DVAT Act. - Violation of principles of natural justice - Default noti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ents. In other words, the Assessee was not put on notice as to the grounds on which the assessments were sought to be reopened. - Existence of Alternative Remedy - Held that:- in the present case the entire proceedings for the months of AY 2009-10 (barring February and March 2010) are barred by limitation. There has also been an obvious violation of the principles of natural justice. - Therefore, the impugned notices of assessment dated 31st March 2014 issued to the Petitioner as well as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Advocate JUDGMENT Dr. S. Muralidhar, J. 1. The challenge in this writ petition by Samsung India Electronics Private Limited is to the demand notices of default assessment of tax and interest dated 31st March 2014 under Section 32 of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 ( DVAT Act ) and the penalty notice of the same date under Section 33 of the DVAT Act issued by the Value Added Tax Officer ( VATO ). Background facts 2. The facts leading to the filing of the present petition are that the Petition .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e on the taxable turnover of a dealer. Entry 41 of the Third Schedule covers IT products including computers, telephones and parts thereof, cellular phones and accessories, etc. Entry 41A deals with the IT products and covers IT products as described in column 2 as covered under the headings or sub-headings mentioned in column 3 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 ( CET Act ). 4. In the table given below Entry 41A there is an Item at Sl. No. 3 which covers a large range of automatic data proc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ariff Act, 1985, then, only those commodities described in this entry and in the entry number 84 will be covered by the scope of this notification and other commodities though covered by the corresponding description in the Central Excise Tariff will not be covered by the scope of this notification. Note-(3). Subject to Note (2), for the purpose of any entry contained in this notification, where the description against any heading or, as the case may be, sub-heading, matches fully with the corre .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n 8th July 2008, an application under Section 84 of the DVAT Act for determination of the following question: Whether LCD Monitors, LCD Displays/Plasma Displays are exempt from tax as being meant for educational purposes like books, periodicals and journals including maps, charts and globes which are covered by Entry No.5 of the First Schedule to the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 and are exempt from tax or the same are covered by Entry No. 41 of the Third Schedule to Delhi Value Added Tax Act, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ere not classifiable as such under any of the entries in the III Schedule to the DVAT Act. 8. In the determination dated 8th July 2008, the Commissioner DT&T held that since the products in question were not classifiable under Clause (18) of Entry 41-A to the Third Schedule of the DVAT Act and since LCD displays/plasma displays do not find any reference in any of the Schedules, they were unclassified items taxable at the rate of 12.5%. Audit proceedings 9. On the basis of the said determinat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

25th May 2014, the Petitioner received a letter dated 8th March 2014 from the VATO, Ward-202 (KCS-II) seeking certain documents/information. Reference was made to an earlier letter dated 11th February 2014 which according to the Petitioner it did not receive. That letter sought additional information from the Petitioner under Section 59 of the DVAT Act in respect of sales of LCD/LED/TFT monitors made during the financial year ( FY ) 2009-10 and 2010-11. The letter sought information regarding s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t of tax and interest under Section 32 of the DVAT Act for the period April 2009 to March 2010 raising a demand of more than ₹ 15 crores. 12. In the impugned notice it was stated that the Petitioner had sold IT related TFT/LCD/LED Monitors by charging VAT at 4% or 5% although the said item is not covered under the Third Schedule to the DVAT Act. Asserting that it has to be classified only under the residuary entry, the demand notice also made a reference to the determination order passed a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and charged VAT at 12.5%, that they were not confronted with the determination dated 8th July 2008 in the case of M/s. NEC India Pvt. Ltd. and therefore, the notice of default assessment and demand of tax, interest and penalty were in violation of the principles of natural justice. When no response was forthcoming, the Petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking the reliefs referred to hereinbefore. 13. At the first hearing of this writ petition on 29th April 2014, the Court, while direct .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Petitioner could file an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, Value Added Tax ( AT ). It is pointed out that initially the Petitioner was issued notice under Section 59(2) of the DVAT Act on 11th February 2014 and again on 8th March 2014 seeking additional information about the sales details of LCD/LED/TFT Monitors. The said notice also stated that if the Petitioner failed to comply with the said notice, the sales shown in the returns filed would be treated that of LCD/LED/TFT Monitors on the s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ubmitted that the term year as defined Section 2(1)(zp) of the DVAT Act means the financial year from the first day of April to the last date of March. The notices had to be issued before the completion of four years after the concerned year, i.e., March 2010. Therefore, the assessments could be made under Section 32 of the DVAT Act up to 31st March 2014 and, therefore, were within time. Submissions of counsel for the Petitioner 16. Mr. S.K. Bagaria, learned Senior counsel for the Petitioner, fi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ext pointed out that when a thorough audit was conducted by the DT&T of the Petitioner's business in 2012, no discrepancy was found. The notice dated 8th March 2014 issued by the VATO only sought information under Section 59(2) of the DVAT Act. This notice was received on 25th March 2014. The earlier letter dated 11th February 2014 was not received by the Petitioner. There is no indication in the said notice of the VATO having invoked powers under Section 32 of the DVAT Act for reopening .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and not in rem. Reliance was placed on the decisions in Vistar Construction (P) Ltd. v. Union of India 2013 (31) STR 129 (Del) and Dhirajlal Girdharilal v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay 26 ITR 736. 18. Mr. Bagaria submitted that what was covered by Item 3 below Entry 41-A to the Third Schedule was Monitor and the LCD/LED/TFT Monitors sold by the Petitioner did fall within the purview of the said Entry and, therefore, were chargeable to tax only at 5%. There was no ambiguity in the Entry for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion of India 1983 (13) ELT 1566; HPL Chemicals Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise 2006 (197) ELT 324 (SC) and Jain Exports Private Limited v. Union of India 1992 (61) ELT 173 (SC). Relying on the decision in Sun Export Corporation v. Collector of Customs, Bombay 1997 (93) ELT 641 (SC), it was submitted that the interpretation that favours the Assessee must be preferred. 19. It was submitted by Mr Bagaria that the Respondents' plea of the existence of an alternative remedy should not be e .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

32 of the DVAT Act was to compute the expiry of the period of four years from the end of the year. The word 'assessment' in Section 34 (1) DVAT Act related only to an assessment under Section 32 of the DVAT Act and not a self-assessment under Section 31(1) of the Act. 21. Referring to the decision in L.G. Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner, Value Added Tax (decision dated 21st January 2014 in W.P. (C) 213/2014), Mr Narayan submitted that the Petitioner had an alternative effica .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

only after notice was issued under Section 59(2) of the Act and only after the authorised representative of the Petitioner appeared and submitted the sales details. He submitted that while Item 3 of Entry 41A of Third Schedule did mention Monitor , it did not mention LCD/LED/TFT Monitors and the same was, therefore, treated as an unclassified item. Admittedly, the dealer had sold the said Monitors by collecting tax of 4% instead of 12% and, therefore, was liable to pay the differential amount o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

xcept by the making of an assessment for the amount. 25. Sections 31, 32 and 34 of the DVAT Act read thus: 31. Self assessment.- (1) Where a return is furnished by a person as required under section 26 or section 27 of this Act which contains the prescribed information and complies with the requirements of this Act and the rules (a) the Commissioner is taken to have made, on the day on which the return is furnished, an assessment of the tax payable of the amount specified in the return; (b) the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

If any person (a) has not furnished returns required under this Act by the prescribed date; or (b) has furnished incomplete or incorrect returns; or (c) has furnished a return which does not comply with the requirements of this Act; or (d) for any other reason the Commissioner is not satisfied with the return furnished by a person; the Commissioner may for reasons to be recorded in writing assess or re-assess to the best of his judgment the amount of net tax due for a tax period or more than on .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

x periods. (2) Where the Commissioner has made an assessment under this section, the Commissioner shall forthwith serve on that person a notice of assessment of the amount of any additional tax due for that tax period. (3) Where the Commissioner has made an assessment under this section and further tax is assessed as owed, the amount of further tax assessed is due and payable on the same date as the date on which the net tax for the tax period was due. Explanation.- A person may, if he disagrees .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that where the Commissioner has reason to believe that tax was not paid by reason of concealment, omission or failure to disclose fully material particulars on the part of the person, the said period shall stand extended to six years. (2) Notwithstanding sub-section (1) of this section, the Commissioner may make an assessment of tax within one year after the date of any decision of the Appellate Tribunal or court where the assessment is required to be made in consequence of, or to give effect t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

) the return is deemed to be a notice of the assessment and to be under the hand of the Commissioner; and (c) the notice referred to in clause (b) is deemed to have been served on the person on the day on which the Commissioner is deemed to have made the assessment. 27. The word assessment , although not defined under the DVAT Act, includes self-assessment. Section 31(1)(a) of the DVAT Act makes this explicit and deems that an assessment is taken to have been made by the Commissioner on the day .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sioner is not satisfied with the return furnished. 29. Where the a dealer has not furnished returns as envisaged under Section 32 (1) (a) of the DVAT Act, then the Commissioner, for reasons to be recorded in writing, can assess the taxable turnover using his 'best judgment' . Where in terms of Section 32 (1)(b), (c) or (d) of the DVAT Act, the dealer has furnished incomplete returns that do not satisfy the requirements of the Act or for any reason the return filed is not satisfactory the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ommissioner made an assessment of the tax for the tax period whichever is earlier (emphasis supplied). 31. Although Mr. Narayan urged that Section 34(1)(b) of the DVAT Act talks only of a Commissioner making an assessment under Section 32 of the DVAT Act, the Court is unable to agree to such a narrow interpretation of the word 'assessment'. Given the context in which it occurs, and the scheme and structure of Section 31 (1) of the DVAT Act, a self-assessment would also be another form of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sessment. The Petitioner has calculated the limitation on the above basis in a tabular form as under: Month & Year Original Return Filed on Four years completed on April 2009 23rd May 2009 22nd May 2013 May 2009 23rd June 2009 22nd June 2013 June 2009 24th July 2009 23rd July 2013 July 2009 21st August 2009 20th August 2013 August 2009 24th September 2009 23rd September 2013 September 2009 23rd October 2009 22nd October 2013 October 2009 25th November 2009 24th November 2013 November 2009 23 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nable to accept with the above submission of the DT&T. Given the overall scheme of the DVAT Act and Section 31, 32 and 34 in particular, the Court accepts the manner of computation of the four year period as depicted by the Petitioner. The notices for reopening of the assessment for the months comprising the Assessment Year 2009-10 ought to have been issued before the expiry of the respective dates as shown in the above table. Barring the reopening of the assessments for February and March 2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

less the conditions of Section 32(1) of the DVAT Act are satisfied, default assessment cannot be made and if made will be liable to be struck down. In a recent decision dated 14th May 2015 in Writ Petition (C) No. 5231/2014 (ITD-ITD Chem JV v. Commissioner of Trade and Taxes) it was emphasised by this Court that for invoking the powers under Section 34 read with Section 32 of the DVAT Act, the jurisdictional pre-conditions must be satisfied. 36. The reasons for re-opening have to be recorded in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that the date on which the Petitioner makes an assessment in terms of Section 31(1)(a) of the DVAT Act is crucial for determining the expiry of the limitation of four years for completion of the reassessment. 37. In that view of the matter, the Court is satisfied that barring the default notices of assessment pertaining to the months of February and March 2010, all the other notices of default assessment issued for the remaining months of AY 2009-10 by the impugned notices dated 31st March 2014 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pecial varieties of monitors should be treated as unclassified and brought under the residuary entry to be taxed at 12.5%. 39. As was cautioned by the Supreme Court in Bharat Forge and Press Industries (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Baroda, Gujarat (supra), the residuary entry ought not to be lightly resorted to. In that case the Court was concerned with Item 26-AA(iv) of the Central Excise Tariff which talks of 'pipes and tubes (including blanks therefor) all sorts whether rolled, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ses all sorts of pipes and tubes. Therefore, there was no reason why a similar item cannot be prescribed as pipes and tubes. Likewise, in the present case, it is not shown by the DT&T that LCD/LED/TFT Monitors cannot be brought under the broad classification of 'Monitors'. 40. In Jain Exports Private Limited v. Union of India (supra), it is held that coconut oil without qualifying words would cover both edible as well as non-edible (commercial or industrial) varieties. It is found in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ncludes milk powder as well. It was held that milk would not only include milk in liquid form but all types of milk. It was held that while looking at the words of an Entry in the Sales Tax legislation, it was permissible to examine the legislative history of the said Entry. It was pointed out that while interpreting a general term used for describing any commodity in any fiscal legislation, the general term so used covers that commodity or item or article in all its forms and varieties . It was .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

age of the residuary clause . 43. In HPL Chemicals Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise (supra), the question was of classification of denatured salt . The Court disagreed with the Department of Excise in that case that the said product was classifiable under the residuary Heading No. 38.23 and not Heading 25.01 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 which was a specific heading. The Court observed as under: This apart, classification of goods is a matter relating to chargeability and the burd .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the goods are classifiable as Denatured Salt falling under Chapter Heading No. 25.01. The Department has not shown that the subject product is not bought or sold or is not known or is dealt with in the market as Denatured Salt. Department s own Chemical Examiner after examining the chemical composition has not said that it is not denatured salt. On the other hand, after examining the chemical composition has opined that the subject matter is to be treated as Sodium Chloride. 44. In Sun Export C .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

;T has not been able to persuade the Court that LCD/LED/TFT monitors sold by the Petitioner during the period under consideration is not classifiable as Monitors under Item 3 below Entry 41A of the Third Schedule to the DVAT Act. Non-compliance with the requirements of Section 32 47. Turning to the impugned notices in the present case, it is seen that although the VATO was required to be satisfied, for the purposes of Section 32(1) of the DVAT Act as to which of the grounds attracted, the VATO c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

O. It is, therefore, unclear as to the precise ground on which the VATO was proceeding to exercise its powers under Section 32(1) of the DVAT Act. In this context, the observation of the Supreme Court in Dhirajlal Girdharilal v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay (supra) is significant. There it is observed that It is well established that when a Court of fact acts on material, partly relevant and partly irrelevant, it is impossible to say to what extent the mind of the Court was affected by the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

59(2) of the DVAT Act issued to the Petitioner asked for additional information in respect of the LCD/LED/TFT Monitors. There was no indication in the said notices regarding any erroneous classification of the monitors as forming the basis for reopening the assessments. There was also no whisper of the determination under Section 84 of the DVAT Act in the case of NEC which, as it transpired, was one of the reasons for reopening the assessments. In other words, the Assessee was not put on notice .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

down in this behalf, compliance with principles of natural justice would be implicit. In case of denial of principles of natural justice in a statute, the same may also be held ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution . Existence of Alternative Remedy 53. Lastly, on the issue of the existence of an alternative remedy, the Court notes that in the present case the entire proceedings for the months of AY 2009-10 (barring February and March 2010) are barred by limitation. There has also been an ob .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Recapitulation:

Recent / Latest:
Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 
 


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version