DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BATHINDA

C.C.No. 321 of 24.11.2020

Decided on : .16-03-2023

M/s Brar Constructions Co. Near Water Works, V.P.O Nandgarh, District Bathinda through its Prop. Sh. Karamjeet Singh S/o Mohinder Singh R/o VPO Nandgarh, Distt. Bathinda.

........Complainant

Versus

M/s Goyal Vehicles, Opposite J.S.S College, Rajpura-Patiala Road, Village Kauli, District Patiala- 147001 through its partner/Prop. Hemant Goyal.

.......Opposite party

Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

QUORUM

Sh. Lalit Mohan Dogra, President

Sh. Shivdev Singh, Member

Present :

For the complainant : Sh. Navneet Kumar Garg, Advocate.

For opposite party : Ex-parte.

ORDER

Lalit Mohan Dogra, President:-

1. The complainant M/s Brar Constructions Co. (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint U/s 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (here-in after referred to as 'Act') before this Commission against M/s Goyal Vehicles (here-in-after referred to as opposite party).

2. Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that he approached opposite party for purchase of a BLAZO 25 6X4 6C BSIV 4250 EROH Bogie Tipper/Truck and in negotiation, opposite party agreed to sell the above mentioned vehicle to the complainant for Rs.29,80,000/- including SGST and CGST.

3. It is alleged that on the day of actual sale, opposite party charged Rs.32,32,000/- from the complainant which included Rs.28,80,000/- financed by HDFC Bank and rest of the amount was paid by complainant in cash. Opposite party issued bill/Invoice no. GV/19-20/038 dated 30.09.2019.

4. It is also alleged that in the Invoice opposite party showed that they have charged Rs.3,50,000/- (as CGST) and Rs.3,50,000/- (as SGST) and Rs.32,000/- as TCS. Now when complainant was filing his GST returns and to claim the refund of CGST and SGST, he came to know that the actual sale price of the above said vehicle was Rs.23,28,125/- and CGST and SGST comes out to be Rs.6,51,875/- and total amount comes out to be Rs.23,28,125 + 6,51,875 = 29,80,000/-. Opposite party have even claimed/ disclosed the said amount with GST Tax Department. So by playing unfair trade practices opposite party has charged Rs.2,52,000/- (32,32,000 - 29,80,000 ) in excess.

5. The complainant alleged that he repeatedly approached the opposite party for the refund of above said excess amount but opposite party delayed the matter on one pretext or the other and lastly on 26.10.2020, opposite party flatly refused to accede to the request of complainant and even used derogatory and filthy language to the complainant. Due to irresponsible behaviour of opposite party, complainant has suffered acute physical as well as mental harassment, botheration and agony for which he claims compensation to the tune of Rs.,2,00,000/-. The complainant also got served legal notice upon the opposite party in this regard but the the said R.C. was received back with endorsement of the postman "Refused to receive". Opposite party has intentionally refused to receive the registered letter.

6. It is further alleged by complainant that in his GST returns complainant has claimed the tax exemption of Rs.3,50,000 (as CGST) Rs.3,50,000/- (as SGST) = 7,00,000/- under the said sale transaction, whereas, after receiving Rs.7,00,000/- from the complainant, opposite party has deposited with GST department Rs.6,51,875/- by showing the sale amount to be Rs.23,28,125/-. If due to said less deposit of GST by the opposite party complainant has to pay any interest, penalty or any other amount to GST department then opposite party is liable to pay the same.

7. On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite party to refund Rs. 2,52,000/- and pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,00,000/- besides litigation expenses of Rs. 22,000/-. The opposite party be also diected to pay penalty, inerest or any other amount, if any, complainant would have to pay to Tax Department.

8. Registered A.D. Notice of complaint was sent to the opposite party but none appeared on its behalf. As such, exparte proceedings were taken against opposite party.

9. The complainant led exparte evidence. In exparte evidence, complainant tendered his affidavit dated 24.11.2020 (Ex. C-1) and the documents (Ex. C-2 to Ex. C-8).

10. We have heard learned counsel for complainant and gone through the file carefully.

11. To prove his case, the complainant has placed on record invoice of the truck as per which the opposite party received Rs. 32,32,000/- from the complainant which included CGST @14% i.e. Rs. 3,50,000/-, SGST @14% i.e. Rs. 3,50,000/- and TCS @1% i.e. Rs. 32,000/- from the complainant. However, the main contention of the complainant is that when he applied for the refund of CGST and SGST from the department, only then he came to know that opposite party has charged excess amount of Rs. 2,68,725/- from the complainant.

12. We have gone through the evidence on record and statement of account regarding refund of CGST and SGST, as per which the amount which has been shown to be received from the complainant is Rs. 30,12,000/- instead of Rs. 32,32,000/- and the amount of SGST and CGST was infact Rs. 6,51,875/- instead of Rs. 7,00,000/-. As such, in the statement Ex. C-5, there is difference of amount as mentioned in the bill Ex. C-2 and in this way, the opposite party has received Rs. 2,68,725/- in excess from the complainant for which the opposite party was having no right to receive and failure of the opposite party to refund the excess amount, even after receiving the legal notice Ex. C-6, amounts to deficiency in service and business mal-practice.

13. Accordingly, present complaint is partly allowed and opposite party is directed to refund the amount of Rs. 2,68,725/- to complainant alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till realization. No order as to costs.

14. The compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

15. The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases.

16. Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.

    Announced:-

    16-03-2023

     

    1. (Lalit Mohan Dogra

    President

     

     

    (Shivdev Singh)

    Member