Supreme Court: Foreign Companies’ Head Office Expenses in India are Capped under Section 44C  ||  SC Directs Trial Courts to Systematically Catalogue Witnesses and Evidence in Criminal Judgments  ||  SC Calls For Sensitising Future Generations on Equality in Marriage to Combat Dowry Practices  ||  SC: Separate Suits Against Confirmed Auction Sales are Barred; Remedy Available under Sec 47  ||  NCLT Mumbai: Oppression Claims Against Majority Shareholders Do not Justify Winding up a Company  ||  J&K&L HC Rules it Illegal and Inequitable to Deny Regularisation to a Daily Wager After 34 Years  ||  J&K&L High Court: Revisional Powers Must Be Used Within Reasonable Time; Merits Don’t Justify Delay  ||  Supreme Court: Compassionate Appointees Cannot Later Claim Entitlement to a Higher Post  ||  NCLAT New Delhi: Insolvency Pleas Cannot Be Admitted When Information Utility Records Show a Dispute  ||  NCLAT: Issuing Cheques For Another Entity’s Liabilities Does not Constitute Operational Debt    

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 2025 - All Rights Reserved