Allowed

Sony India Pvt. Ltd. v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi HC17 Apr 2017W.P.(C)/1406/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition filed by Sony India Pvt. Ltd., the High Court of Delhi, guided by a prior decision in Ingram Micro, directed the DVAT Department to issue bifurcated F forms for Andhra Pradesh and Telangana within three weeks, allowing for a ten-day window to furnish an indemnity bond if required.

What did the court decide?

PVAT Department to issue bifurcated F forms within three weeks. Indemnity bond may be required within two weeks.

Sony India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors. — Delhi HC (2017) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~24

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 1406/2017

¶4

SONY INDIA PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Tarun Gulati, Mr.Sparsh Bhargava, Mr.Nikhil Gupta and Mr.Tushar Gupta, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Satyakam and Mr.Akshay Allagh, Advs.

¶7

CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

¶8

O R D E R % 17.04.2017

¶9

Notice. Mr Satyakam, Advocate accepts notice for the Respondents.

¶10

The reliefs sought in this petition are:

¶11

“(a) that this Hon‟ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondents to either issue F forms (manually/ online) from Delhi with bifurcated details for the States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana or allow petitioner to revise DVAT returns to correct discrepancies in the stock transfer details for the period June to September 2014 so that correct F forms can printed from the VAT website; "

¶12

(b) that this Hon‟ble Court be pleased to issue a writ, order or directions in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction of like nature, to call for, examine the records in relation to the returns or other information filed with the Respondents;

¶13

W.P.(C) 1406/2017

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

(c) that this Hon‟ble Court be pleased to Issue a Writ of mandamus, or a Writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, Order of directions, directing the Respondents to allow the Petitioner to obtain F Form (manually or online) with bifurcated figures and separate registration number and addresses of Petitioner‟s branches in State of Andhra Pradesh and State of Telangana".

¶16

It is seen that the necessity for the Petitioner having to bifurcate the F forms arose as a result of the creation of the separate State of Telangana & Andhra Pradesh. The Petitioner further points out that there is no tax effect as far as the Govt. of NCT of Delhi is concerned. In para 14 of the writ petition, the Petitioner has not set out the quantity in value of the stock transfer from Telangana and Andhra Pradesh on a consolidated basis which though reported correctly to the authorities could not be done with the TIN numbers as a result of the above bifurcation.

¶17

The facts and circumstances of this case are similar to the one in which the decision in Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, Department of Trade & Taxes (2016) 89 VST 312 (Del) was delivered.

¶18

This writ petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of the decision of this Court in Ingram Micro India ( supra ) by directing that the DVAT Department will issue to the Petitioner the requisite „F‟ form. In the event the DVAT Department desires that an Indemnity Bond should be furnished, it will communicate such requirement to the Petitioner not later than two weeks from today and proceed issue the F forms not later than three weeks from today.

¶19

W.P.(C) 1406/2017

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

The petition stands is disposed of in the above terms.

¶22

S.MURALIDHAR, J

¶23

NAJMI WAZIRI, J

¶24

APRIL 17, 2017 neelam

¶25

Page 3 of 3

¶26

W.P.(C) 1406/2017

Sony India Pvt. Ltd. v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sony India Pvt. Ltd. v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajinder Prashad Vs Union of India & Ors.

Pema Tsekyi Bhutia Vs Union of India & Ors.

Tenzin Passang Vs Union of India & Ors.

Delhi Transport Corporation Vs Tara Chand and Ors.

Namgyal Institute of Research Vs D.D.A & Anr.

Virendra Pandey Vs New Delhi Municipal Council and Anr.

V.Vikraman Vs UOI & Ors.

Ganesh Chandra Makur Vs Union of India & Ors.

Delhi Transport Corporation Vs Tara Chand and Ors.

Odeon Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Service Tax & Anr.

Satvir Vs Assistant Collector Grade-Ii Co-Operative Societies & Ors.

Pr. Commissioner of Income TAX-4 Vs Gulbarga Associates(P)Limited

Pr. Commissioner of Income TAX-4 Vs Gulbrga Associates (P)Limited

Pr. Commissioner of Income TAX-4 Vs Gulbarga Associates (P)Limited