Gsp Power System PVT LTD vs. Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax Department Of Trade And Taxes & Anr.

Held

The Court held that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending. Consequently, the Court directed respondent no.2 to allow the amendment sought by the petitioner in its return for the first quarter of the Financial Year 2017-18. However, this direction was expressly made subject to the outcome of the Civil Appeals pending before the Supreme Court. The Court stated that this direction would abide by the decision rendered by the Supreme Court. The Court did not decide the substantive issue of whether the revision should have been allowed outright, but rather suspended the relief pending the Supreme Court's decision.

Facts

The petitioner, GSP Power System Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging the rejection of its request to correct a GST return for the first quarter of 2017-18. The petitioner had failed to include details of inter-State branch transfers in Form 2A uploaded on the DVAT website. The petitioner sought a direction to allow revision of returns for 2017-18 under the DVAT Act and Rules, arguing that the refusal to permit the revision of details for Form 'F' was perverse and contrary to the relevant provisions. The respondents contended that similar matters, including those relied upon by the petitioner, were under challenge before the Supreme Court, with interim orders suspending the High Court's directions.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondent authorities acted perversely in law by refusing to allow the petitioner to revise its return for the first quarter of 2017-18 to include details of inter-State branch transfers and the requirement of Form 'F', contrary to the provisions of the DVAT Act and Central Sales Tax (Delhi) Rules? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the refusal to allow revision was contrary to the DVAT Act and Central Sales Tax (Delhi) Rules, which permit the issuance of forms. They relied on a previous judgment of the Delhi High Court in WP(C) No.8709/2018, directing the release of Form 'F', while acknowledging that an SLP against it was pending before the Supreme Court. Respondents' Arguments: The respondents contended that several High Court judgments, including those cited by the petitioner, were under challenge before the Supreme Court. They pointed to interim orders from the Supreme Court that suspended the operation of High Court judgments in similar matters, leading this Court to either adjourn cases or allow petitions but suspend relief until the pending Civil Appeals before the Supreme Court were decided.