Belated form C would be furnished on showing good & sufficient reasons, HC

Facts in Brief:

1. The Petitioner is the manufacturer of vegetable oil and a registered dealer under the Pondicherry Value Added Tax Act and also under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The Petitioner used to buy imported RBD Palm Oil from various importers and transport the oil to its factory at Thirubuvani at Pondicherry.

2. The Petitioner is effecting local sales, inter-state sales and also stock transfers. The local sales of refined vegetable oil is taxable at 5% and the fatty acid oil is taxable at 3%. For the assessment years, CST 2011-2012, 2012-2013 and 2013-2014, the Petitioner effected local sales, inter-state sales and also stock transfers and reported the same in the monthly returns under the PVAT Act and the CST Act.

3. For the assessment years CST 2011-2012 and CST 2012-2013, the 1st Respondent issued a notice dated 9.1.2015, proposing to levy tax at 5% for the inter-state sales turnover for non-submission of C forms and in respect of stock transfer related turnover, it was proposed to levy tax at the rate of 5% for non-submission of F form declarations and proposing to levy tax at 5% for the inter-state sales turnover for non-submission of 'C' forms respectively.

4. Since the Petitioner did not file the C forms and F forms before the 1st Respondent within time, the 1st Respondent passed the assessment orders on 20.02.2015, levying tax on the inter-state sales turnover not covered by C forms and also levied tax on the stock transfer turnover for want of F form declarations.

5. For the assessment year TIN 2011-2012, the 1st Respondent, in the assessment order dated 20.2.2015, has wrongly levied tax at the rate of 5%, instead of the correct rate of tax at 3% on the turnover relating to refined vegetable oil and also wrongly levied tax at the rate of 5%, instead of the correct rate of tax at 3% on the turnover relating to Fatty Acid Oil. In respect of the assessment year TIN 2012-2013, the 1st Respondent in the assessment order dated 20.02.2015 has reversed the input tax credit of Rs.5,49,036/- for want of C forms.

6. Thereafter, for the assessment year 2011-2012, the Petitioner submitted C forms and F form declarations on line and also filed application dated 23.3.2015, giving reasons for the belated filing, for rectification of the assessment orders dated 20.2.2015 passed for the assessment years CST 2011-2012 and TIN 2011-2012.

7. However, no order has been passed on the said rectification applications. But, however, 1st Respondent issued the impugned notice, dated 13.5.2015 to the 2nd Respondent, attaching the Petitioner's bank account towards the arrears of tax for the assessment years 2011-2012 to 2013-2014 under the CST Act and also PVAT Act.

8. Thereafter, the Petitioner approached the 1st Respondent requesting to lift the bank attachment and to pass fresh assessment orders for the assessment years CST 2011-2012 and TIN 2011-2012 based on the said rectification applications. Further, in respect of the assessment year CST 2013-2014 and TIN 2013-2014, the Petitioner brought to the attention of the 1st Respondent that without there being an assessment order passed by the 1st Respondent for the above two assessment years, the attachment of their bank account towards arrears of tax is without authority of law and so requested to withdraw the same.

9. In the meantime, the Petitioner submitted some 'C' forms for the assessment year CST 2012-2013 and also filed an application dated 13.07.2015 before the 1st Respondent, requesting to rectify the assessment order dated 20.2.2015. Further, the Petitioner also filed another application dated 13.07.2015, requesting the 1st Respondent to rectify the assessment order dated 20.2.2015 passed for the assessment year TIN 2012-2013 to grant the benefit of input tax credit on the strength of the C forms now filed by them.

10. However, the 1st Respondent till date has not rectified the assessment orders dated 20.2.2015 passed for the assessment years CST 2011-2012, TIN 2011-2012, CST 2012-2013 and TIN 2012-2013 based on the rectification applications dated 23.3.2015 and 13.07.2015. Further, in respect of bank attachment made for the above assessment years and also for the assessment year CST 2013-2014 and TIN 2013-2014, the 1st Respondent has not taken any action.

11. Further, without there being an assessment order for the assessment year CST 2013-2014 and TIN 2013-2014, the attachment of the bank account of the Petitioner towards arrears of tax is without authority of law.

12. In such circumstances, these Writ Petitions have been filed for the reliefs as stated above.

HC held as under,

13. In the decision of the Full Bench of this Court reported in 51-STC-281 (State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Arulmurugan and Company), confirmed by the Honourable Supreme Court, it is stated that the belated Form C would be furnished even before the Appellate Authority on showing good and sufficient reason for failure to furnish Form C, within the time limit.

14. In the above circumstances, even though the Rule prescribes time limit under the Pondicherry VAT Rules, the issue involved in these Writ Petitions is covered by the order of this court reported in 51-STC-281 (State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Arulmurugan and Company), as the Petitioner also made rectification applications, satisfied with the claim of the Petitioner, this court is of the view that the Petitioner can be given an opportunity to produce all the statutory forms for making appropriate assessment orders.

15. Accordingly, the impugned orders are quashed and the 1st Respondent is directed to consider the rectification applications of the Petitioner filed under Section 73 of the Pondicherry Value Added Tax Act, 2007 read with Section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and rectify the errors, if any, on the face of the record and consider the statutory forms 'C' and 'F' filed by the petitioner online or manually, and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law. The petitioner is permitted to produce all the statutory forms within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on such filing, appropriate orders be passed by the 1st Respondent within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the forms from the petitioner, without causing further delay. If the petitioner fails to avail this opportunity, orders be passed on merits, forthwith.

16. With the above directions, these Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 

Case Reference - M/S.Pandi Devi Oil Private ... vs The Additional Deputy Commercial.