Supreme Court Issues Directions to Speed Up MACT Claims Amid Six-Year Average Pendency  ||  Supreme Court: Sex Selection Practices Continues Due to Preference For Male Children  ||  Supreme Court: Injury From a Fallen Tree is Not a Motor Accident for MACT Claims  ||  Madras HC: Recent Tamil Nadu Elections Reflect Voting Beyond Caste and Community Considerations  ||  Supreme Court: Children Should Not Undergo Psychological Tests in Custody Cases Unless Necessary  ||  Jharkhand HC: Lokayukta Cannot Delegate Core Adjudicatory Powers Even in Case Against Brother  ||  Ker HC: Complainant Can Invoke Presumptions After Proving Transaction, Cheque Execution Convincingly  ||  Supreme Court Cancels SARFAESI Auction Sale After 16 Years Due to a 5-Day Payment Delay  ||  Jhar HC Orders 2-Month Probe Deadline, DGP Monitoring to Overhaul Sexual Violence Response in State  ||  Delhi HC: Social Media Cannot Undermine Judiciary; Intermediaries Must Act Without Court Orders    

Capri Bathaid Private Limited and Ors. v. Commissioner of Trade and Taxes - (High Court of Delhi) (02 Mar 2016)

CVAT castigated for frequent illegal exercise of powers

MANU/DE/0501/2016

Sales Tax/VAT

Section 87(6) of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 does not enable officers undertaking search and seizure operations under Section 60 of the Act to collect tax dues on the spot from the dealer wholes premises is searched, the Delhi High Court held. The Court also rebuked the Department's failure to issue clear and unambiguous instructions to its officers on the exercise of their powers and jurisdiction. It noted the alarming frequency with which cases regarding flagrant misuse of power were reaching courts. The CVAT was ordered to "issue clear instructions that no VAT Authority will collect in cash or by cheque any alleged tax demand on the spot/field while undertaking a survey, or a search or seizure operation...if any of the officers of the DT and T are found violating any of the instructions, they would be subject to disciplinary proceedings."

Relevant : Bansal Dyechem Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax MANU/DE/2865/2015 The Commissioner, Sales Tax, U.P. vs. Suraj Prasad Gouri Shankar MANU/SC/0568/1972 Packirisamy vs. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (Enforcement I), Tiruvarur, MANU/TN/2475/2005 Section 87 Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004

Tags : DELHI   VAT   OFFICIALS   EXERCISE OF POWER  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved