DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA
CC.No.22 of 03-01-2014
Decided on 09-04-2014
Madan Lal aged about 55 years S/o Om Parkash Jain, H.No.20204, Gali No.18, Parinda Road, Guru Tegh Bahadur Nagar, Bathinda.
........Complainant
Versus
1.Punsup Gas Service (Distributor Bharat Gas), Veer Colony, Amrik Singh Road, Bathinda, through its Manager.
2.Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., LPG (Bathinda), A-1 & A-2,
PSIEC Growth Centre, Mansa Road, Bathinda, through its Territory
Manager.
3.Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., LPG Bharat Gas, Regd. Office:
Bharat Bhawan, 4 & 6, Currimbhoy Road, Ballard Estate,
Mumbai-400001, through its Chairman.
.......Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM
Smt.Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.
Smt.Sukhwinder Kaur, Member.
Sh.Jarnail Singh, Member.
Present:-
For the Complainant: Sh.Sham Lal Goyal, counsel for the complainant.
For Opposite parties: Sh.Sudhir Kumar Goyal, counsel for the opposite party
No.1.
Opposite party Nos.2 and 3 ex-parte.
ORDER
VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-
1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant under
section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date
(Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). Briefly stated the case of the
complainant is that on 21.11.2013, he received one domestic LPG refill
for Rs.1012/- (Rs.969.35/- base rate + Rs.42.65/- vat tax) from the
opposite party No.1. The VAT tax of Rs.42.65/- charged on the amount of
Rs.969.35/- is illegal and in-operative and subsequently further VAT tax
charging on the subsidy amount for every refill by the distributor is
also illegal and against the law and facts. As the subsidy amount of
Rs.603.18/- is to be paid by the Central Government, thus as per law no
VAT/Sales Tax (Including surcharge) can be levied on the subsidy amount,
in this way the opposite parties should have charged the amount of
Rs.985.46/- including VAT + Surcharge + Subsidy for one domestic LPG
refill, from the consumers and should have charged VAT + Surcharge to
the tune of Rs.16.11/- on the actual amount of Rs.366.17/- after
deducting the subsidy amount of Rs.603.18/- out of the base rate of
Rs.969.35/-. Thus the opposite parties have charged the amount of
Rs.26.54/- in excess on the subsidy amount granted by the Central
Government from the complainant, as such he is entitled for the refund
of the excess amount charged by the opposite parties. The complainant
received the amount of Rs.552.89/- on dated 23.11.2013 as subsidy amount
as credited in the bank account instead of the amount of Rs.603.18/- as
subsidy amount passed by the Government of India, as such he is
entitled for the refund of Rs.50.29/- from the opposite parties. The
complainant further alleged that the Central Government sent the subsidy
amount directly to the gas distributor/BPCL, it has not charged the VAT
tax on the subsidy amount from the consumer. Now the Central Government
has sent the subsidy amount directly in the consumer account, so why
the distributor/BPCL is charging the VAT tax on the subsidy amount from
the consumer for every refill. As per the direct benefit transfer for
LPG, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Government of India Scheme
the direct benefit transfer for LPG consumer (DBTL) is the scheme aimed
to improve the subsidy administration of the LPG across the country and
as per this scheme an LPG consumer will get his/her cylinder at full
market price i.e. subsidy will be transferred to his/her bank account
upto a capped limit (9 cylinders in a year). The complainant several
times requested the opposite parties to consider the matter in dispute
and to refund him the abovesaid amount, but the opposite parties did not
give any response to his requests. Hence the present complaint filed by
the complainant to seek the directions of this Forum to the opposite
parties not to recover the amount of Rs.26.54/- on the subsidy amount
granted by the Central Government from the consumers and to refund him
the amount of Rs.26.54/- charged in excess and Rs.50.29/- as they
credited the amount of Rs.552.89/- in the bank account on dated
23.11.2013 instead of Rs.603.18/- as subsidy amount passed by the
Government of India alongwith cost and compensation or to give him any
additional or alternative relief for which he may be found entitled to.
2. The opposite party No.1 after appearing before this Forum has
filed its written statement and pleaded that it does not fix the rates
of the gas cylinders, rather it is only a distributor and the rates of
the gas cylinders have been fixed by the Bharat Petroleum Corporation
Limited as per its policy, the online booking is done and accordingly,
the cylinder delivery is made. The complainant has concealed the true
and material facts from this Forum and has not come before this Forum
with clean hands to seek the relief. The true facts are that the
complainant is having gas connection bearing No.2307 and booked the
online gas cylinder refill on dated 21.11.2013 and the delivery of the
gas cylinder has been given to him against the said booking and he has
been charged the amount of Rs.1012/- (Rs.969.35/- + Rs.42.65/-) for the
same and as per the policy the amount of Rs.34,410/- has been deposited
in the account in PNB Bathinda vide release order No.17 dated 21.11.2013
on dated 22.11.2013. As per the policy the Punjab Government levied the
amount of Rs.42.65/- as VAT and the opposite party No.1 has nothing do
with the same. The said amount was charged as VAT from the consumers
that has been paid to the Punjab Government. The opposite party No.1
further pleaded that as per the directions and policy of the opposite
party Nos.2 and 3, the opposite party No.1 has charged the amount of
Rs.1012/- including the amount of Rs.42.65/- as VAT, as such according
to the policy of the opposite party Nos.2 and 3, the VAT has been paid
to the Punjab Government and subsidy amount has been deposited in the
account of the consumer. The opposite party No.1 has not recovered or
charged the excess amount, rather the payment has been received as per
the policy and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the
opposite party No.1. The opposite parties are charging the amount as per
the policy and guidelines of the Government. A number of subsidized gas
cylinders has been increased from 9 to 12 in a year.
3. Registered notice has been sent to the opposite party No.2 vide
postal receipt No.A RP295374292IN and opposite party No.3 vide postal
receipt No.A RP295374434IN on dated 20.1.2014, but despite receiving the
summons, none appeared on behalf of the opposite party Nos.2 and 3
before this Forum, hence ex-parte proceedings are taken against them.
4. The parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.
5. Arguments heard. The record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.
6. The matter in dispute is regarding crediting the less amount as
subsidy in the account of the complainant, charging the excess amount
from him and imposing VAT tax on the subsidy amount given by the Central
Government. The complainant received one domestic LPG refill for
Rs.1012/- (Rs.969.35/- base rate + Rs.42.65/- vat tax) from the opposite
party No.1 on 21.11.2013. The VAT tax of Rs.42.65/- charged on the
amount of Rs.969.35/-, which the opposite parties cannot charge. As the
subsidy amount of Rs.603.18/- is to be paid by the Central Government,
thus as per law no VAT/Sales Tax (Including surcharge) can be levied on
the subsidy amount, in this way the opposite parties should have charged
the amount of Rs.985.46/- including VAT + Surcharge + Subsidy for one
domestic LPG refill, from the consumers and should have charged VAT +
Surcharge to the tune of Rs.16.11/- on the actual amount of Rs.366.17/-
after deducting the subsidy amount of Rs.603.18/- out of the base rate
of Rs.969.35/-. The opposite parties should have not charged the amount
of Rs.26.54/- in excess on the subsidy amount granted by the Central
Government from the complainant. The complainant received the amount of
Rs.552.89/- on dated 23.11.2013 as subsidy amount as credited in the
bank account instead of the amount of Rs.603.18/- as subsidy amount
passed by the Government of India, as such he is entitled for the refund
of Rs.50.29/- from the opposite parties. The Central Government sent
the subsidy amount directly to the gas distributor/BPCL, it has not
charged the VAT tax on the subsidy amount from the consumer. Now the
Central Government has sent the subsidy amount directly in the consumer
account, thus the distributor/BPCL has no right to charge the VAT tax on
the subsidy amount from the consumer for every refill.
7. The submission of the opposite party Nos.1 and 2 is that the
complainant booked online gas cylinder refill on dated 21.11.2013 and
its delivery has been given to him and he has been charged the amount of
Rs.1012/- (Rs.969.35/- + Rs.42.65/-) for the same and as per the policy
the amount of Rs.34,410/- has been deposited in the account in PNB
Bathinda vide release order No.17 dated 21.11.2013 on dated 22.11.2013.
As per the policy the Punjab Government levied the amount of Rs.42.65/-
as VAT and the opposite party No.1 has nothing do with the same. As per
the directions and policy of the opposite party Nos.2 and 3, the
opposite party No.1 has charged the amount of Rs.1012/- including the
amount of Rs.42.65/- as VAT, as such according to the policy of the
opposite party Nos.2 and 3, the VAT has been paid to the Punjab
Government and subsidy amount has been deposited in the account of the
consumer.
8. A perusal of record placed on file shows that the complainant
received LPG refill vide Ex.C2 for Rs.1012/- (Rs.969.35/- base rate +
Rs.42.65/- vat tax) on dated 21.11.2013 against the subsidy of
Rs.552.89/-; vide Ex.C8 for Rs.1081.50/- (Rs.1035.92/- base rate +
Rs.45.58/- vat tax) on dated 18.12.2013 against the subsidy of
Rs.615.63/-; vide Ex.C9 for Rs.1311.50/- (Rs.1256.23/- base rate +
Rs.55.27/- vat tax) on dated 14.1.2014 against the subsidy of
Rs.835.94/-; vide Ex.C10 for Rs.1204.50/- (Rs.1153.74 base rate +
Rs.50.76/- vat tax) on dated 21.2.2014 against the subsidy of
Rs.733.45/- and vide Ex.C11 for Rs.1152/- (Rs.1103.45/- base rate +
Rs.48.55/- vat tax) on dated 8.3.2014 against the subsidy of
Rs.683.16/-.
9. As per the submission of the complainant the opposite parties
should have charged VAT + Surcharge to the tune of Rs.16.11/- on the
actual amount of Rs.366.17/- after deducting the subsidy amount of
Rs.603.18/- out of the base rate
of Rs.969.35/-.The opposite parties have charged the amount of
Rs.26.54/- in excess from the complainant on the subsidy amount granted
by the Central Government. The subsidy amount of Rs.552.89/- has been
received by the complainant on dated 23.11.2013 instead of the amount of
Rs.603.18/-, thus the complainant is entitled for the refund of
Rs.50.29/- from the amount of Rs.603.18/-. As the subsidy amount is sent
directly by the Central Government to the consumers, so the opposite
parties cannot levy the VAT on the subsidy amount. In its defence the
opposite party No.1 has submitted that the Punjab Government levied the
amount of Rs.42.65/- as VAT and the same has been charged from the
complainant, thus the amount of Rs.1012/- has been charged from the
complainant including the VAT of Rs.42.65/-.
10. Thus from the facts, circumstances and evidence placed on file it
is clear that the opposite parties cannot charge the VAT on the subsidy
amount sent to it by the Central Government. Moreover the VAT is to be
charged on the actual rate, not on the subsidy amount, which amounts to
unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. The opposite
party Nos.2 and 3 have not intentionally appeared before this Forum
despite receiving summons or did not find it appropriate to sent their
written statement through post or in any manner, which clearly depicts
that they were well aware of the fact that some discrepancy has been
done on their part. A perusal of all receipts i.e. Ex.C2, Ex.C8, Ex.C9,
Ex.C10 and Ex.C11 show that the base rates differ and according to that
VAT taxes also differ and subsidy amounts also differ, due to which it
is difficult for the layman to understand what was the actual rate of
the refill and how the subsidy amount has been calculated and on which
amount the VAT has been calculated, again this amounts to unfair trade
practice on the part of the opposite parties. At the time of issuance of
all these receipts and seeking the payment by the consumers, no
explanation has been given regarding the base rate, VAT and subsidy
amount. Thus all the receipts show the different base rate, accordingly,
VAT has been calculated and subsidy amounts also differ. The
complainant has sought the information under RTI Act, in reply to this
vide Ex.C18 Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. has given the details of
the LPG refill rates, the relevant portion of Ex.C18 is reproduced:-
“1) Domestic LPG refill rates break up is given below:-
Sr. No.
Items
Rate for Domestic
(i)
Billable rate
Rs.378.79/-
(ii)
Sales Tax (Incl.Surcharge)
Rs.16.67/-
(iii)
Cost to the Distributor
Rs.395.46/-
(iv)
Distributor's Commission
Rs.37.25/- (Including Rs.15/- charged for home delivery of cylinders
(v)
VAT
Rs.1.64/-
(vi)
Retail Selling Price
Rs.434/- (Rounded off)
(vii)
Actual subsidy given per cylinder by Government of India
Rs.450/-
2) The break up of rates of Non subsidized cylinder with aadhar card linked is given below:-
Sr. No.
Items
Rate for Domestic
(i)
Billable rate
Rs.931.43/-
(ii)
Sales Tax (Incl.Surcharge)
Rs.40.98/-
(iii)
Cost to the Distributor
Rs.972.41/-
(iv)
Distributor's Commission
Rs.38/- (Including Rs.15/- charged for home delivery of cylinders
(v)
VAT
Rs.1.67/-
(vi)
Retail Selling Price
Rs.1012/- (Rounded off)
(vii)
One time advance for refill by Government of India
Rs.435/-
(viii)
Subsidy amount passed by Government of India
Rs.603.18/-”
A perusal of Ex.C12 shows that on 21.11.2013 the subsidy amount has
been given to the tune of Rs.552.89/-; on 21.12.2013, Rs.615.63/-; on
16.1.2014, Rs.835.94/- and on 25.2.2014, Rs.733.45/-, this is not
understandable that how the subsidy amount has been calculated. The
opposite parties have given the break of subsidized LPG Refill and
non-subsidized LPG Refill linked with aadhar card.
11. Therefore in view of what has been discussed above there is
unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this
complaint is accepted with Rs.5000/- as cost and compensation against
the opposite parties. The opposite parties are directed to refund the
amount of Rs.26.54/- (i.e. charged in excess) and Rs.50.29/- (i.e. the
amount credited less from the subsidy amount in his account) to the
complainant.
12. The compliance of this order be done within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
13. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.
Pronounced in open Forum:-
09-04-2014
(Vikramjit Kaur Soni)
President
(Sukhwinder Kaur)
Member
(Jarnail Singh)
Member