The High Court of Delhi dismissed an application for condonation of a 674-day delay in filing a VAT appeal. The court held the delay was substantial and unjustified and treated the underlying appeal as dismissed without examining merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~24
COMMISSIONER OF VALUE ADDED TAX, DELHI ..... Appellant Through Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, ASC, GNCTD with Mr. Deboshree Mukherjee, Advocate.
versus
M/ S INDIAN HOTELS COMPANY LIMITED ..... Respondent Through Mr. Gogan Kumar, Mr. Rohan Sharma and Mr. Dheeraj P., Advocates.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR
CM No. 2629/2018 and VAT APPEAL No. 2/2018.
As per office report notice was not issued for want of process fee. However, respondent had entered appearance.
CM No. 2629/2018 is an application for condonation of delay of 674 days in filing of the appeal under Section 81 of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 against the judgement dated 1st January, 2016 passed by the Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Value Added Tax in Appeal Nos. 255258/ATVAT/14-15.
Paragraph 3.3 of the application refers to list of dates and how the file for approval had moved from one officer to the other. List of dates would indicate that there were time gaps for which there is no explanation. The
delay is certainly substantial and without good cause and justification. We are not, therefore, inclined to condone the same.
Counsel for the appellant on the last date of hearing had stated that issue involved and raised is of considerable importance and would have substantial tax implication as the Tribunal has held that on services charge or fee, only service tax was payable and value added tax was not chargeable. While issuing notice, vide order dated 22nd January, 2018, we had recorded that the Court in view of delay may not interfere with the impugned order retrospectively. Counsel for the parties state that Goods and Services Tax has been enforced w.e.f. 1st July, 2017 and hence prospective ruling and decision would not be of consequence.
In view of the aforesaid position, we dismiss the present application for condonation of delay. However, we make it clear that this Court has not examined the issue on merits. In case of an adverse order by the Tribunal in another appeal, it will be open to the Revenue to challenge the same in accordance with law before the High Court.
In view of the fact that the application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal is dismissed, the appeal would be also treated as dismissed.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
CHANDER SHEKHAR, J.
APRIL 02, 2018 MR/NA
2 issues framed by the court
Whether condonation of delay of 674 days in filing a VAT appeal is warranted in view of lack of explanation and absence of substantive issue given GST enforcement.
Whether the significant delay in filing the appeal requires condonation under Section 81 of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
COMMISSIONER OF VALUE ADDED TAX, DELHI
M/ S INDIAN HOTELS COMPANY LIMITED
SANJIV KHANNA
CHANDER SHEKHAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
