Delhi HC stays Notification cancelling F Forms issued by Dealers [Read Order]

A two-judge bench of the Delhi High Court has stayed the notification issued by the State Government cancelling form F issued by a dealer in Delhi. The cancellation was purportedly under rule 8(10) of CST (Delhi) Rules which allows commisisoner to cancel forms of particular series, design or colour.

The Petitioner, a registered dealer located in Uttarakhand and is engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of edible oils, fats and oleo chemicals approached the High Court challenging the said notification. The Petitioner supplied edible oil on stock transfer basis to one M/s Kumar & Company registered under the Central Sales Tax Act and located in Delhi during the Financial Years (FYs) 2014-15 & 2015-16. It is stated that “edible oil” is mentioned in the Registration Certificate Form B, issued by the Delhi VAT Authorities under the CST Act to the said Kumar & Company.

Before the High Court, the counsels for the petitioners Advocates Puneet Agrawal, Bharat Agarwal, and Anubhav Gupta submitted that Section 6A of CST Act is intended to decommission unused forms, which position becomes clear on a combined reading of Rule 8 (10) with Rule 8 (11) of the CST Delhi Rules. It was further submitted that there is no power in the VAT Commissioner under the aforementioned rules to declare used forms as obsolete. The power is only to declare unused forms of a particular series, colour and design, as obsolete.

Granting an interim order, Justice S Muralidhar and Justice I S Mehta observed that “A careful examination of the order in M/s. Jai Gopal International Impex Pvt. Ltd. (supra) reveals that a parallel cannot be drawn between the facts of the said case and that the case on hand.”

“The Court is satisfied that the Petitioner has made out a prima facie case for grant if an ad interim order in its favour. It is accordingly directed that till the next date of hearing, the impugned notification dated 18th June, 2018 issued by the Respondent No.2 shall remain stayed,” the bench said.