Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/733/2016

Anjali Moudgil - Complainant(s)

Versus

United Color of Benetton - Opp.Party(s)

Saurav Bhatia Adv.

12 Dec 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

Consumer Complaint  No	:	733 of 2016
Date  of  Institution	:	07.09.2016
Date   of   Decision	:	12.12.2016

 

 

 

 

 

Anjali Moudgil d/o Ashwani Kumar r/o Anukampa, Main Street, Mohan Nagar, Dera Bassi.

                …..Complainant

Versus

 

United Color of Benetton, Shop No.38-A, Ground Floor, Elante Mall, Purv Marg, MW Area, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh -160002 through its Proprietor/Incharge.

….. Opposite Party

 

 

BEFORE:    SH.RAJAN DEWAN                     PRESIDENT

                SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA                 MEMBER

                SH.RAVINDER SINGH                 MEMBER

 

 

ARGUED BY:     

Sh.Saurav Bhatia, Adv. for the complainant.

Sh.Sumeet Goel & Sh.Krishan M.Vohra, Advocates for the OP.

 

 

PER RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

                In brief, the case of the complainant is that the OP, in order to promote the sale of its products, offered discount @ 30%  on the M.R.P. She purchased a jean of the MRP of Rs.2999/- for Rs.2204.27P vide Retail Invoice dated 29.06.2016, Annexure C-1.  However, she was shocked to see the Invoice dated 29.06.2016 (Annexure C-1) that a sum of Rs.104.97P was charged towards VAT @ 5% on the discounted price.  It has been averred that the cost of the article was already inclusive of all taxes. She objected to the charging of 5% VAT at the cost of the article but to no effect.  It has been averred that the OP has no legal right to charge the VAT on the MRP which is always inclusive of all taxes.  Alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OP, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.

2.         In its written statement, the OP took preliminary objections inter alia that the Forum does  not have the jurisdiction to adjudicate the pricing issue; that the Forum lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate an issue covered under the VAT Act; that the allegations made in the complaint cannot be adjudicated in a summary proceedings; that the complaint is not maintainable as it fails to bring on record any document to prove mis-representation on the part of the OP;  It has further been pleaded that a discounted price does not become a New MRP that ought to be inclusive of all taxes as is being alleged by the complainant. It has further been pleaded that the MRP is purely a valuable consideration received against the sale of product. It has further been pleaded that the complainant never raised any issue in relation to the charging of VAT on the discounted price, since he was well informed about the terms and conditions displayed alongwith advertisements pertaining to the discount scheme.  It was denied that the complainant was charged tax on tax.  Pleading that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part, Opposite Parties have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3.         The parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
4.         We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have gone through the documents on record.
2.         After hearing the Counsel for the parties and going through the evidence on record, we are of the considered view that the complaint is liable to be dismissed for the reasons stated hereinafter. The complainant has produced on record a copy of the Invoice of the item in question from which it cannot be ascertained that as to whether the MRP of the item in question is inclusive of all the taxes or not.  The complainant has not produced on record a copy of the price tag of the item in question to corroborate the fact that the price of the item in question is inclusive of all the taxes and that the OPs have illegally charged VAT on the discounted price. Hence, the complainant has failed to prove his case against the OPs.
3.         For the reasons recorded above, finding the complaint to be devoid of any merit, the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.
4.         The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

12.12.2016

 

Sd/-

(RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

(PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER