Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + HC Service Tax - 2018 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (3) TMI 931 - HC - Service TaxCondonation of delay in making payment of tax - Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme, 2013 (VCES) - It is claimed in this affidavit that the petitioners cannot insist on the delay being condoned, because the scheme is not open ended - Held that: - a proviso was provided to sub-section (4) of section 107 and which enables the person, who fails to pay said tax dues or part thereof on or before the said date, namely, 30th June, 2014, to pay the same on or before 31st day of December, 2014 along with interest thereon at such rate as is fixed under section 75 or, as the case may be, section 73B of the Chapter for the period of delay starting from the 1st day of July, 2014. Thus, this was a concession or relaxation given, but not without condition. There was a condition, namely, to pay interest and within the outer time limit. This is not an open ended scheme. The benefits thereunder cannot be derived dehors the scheme or after its life or duration has come to an end. The relaxation or concession, which can be granted in terms of the scheme have been outlined in the scheme itself and particularly by sub-section (4) of section 107. It is not the intent that the tax dues for the period 1st October, 2007 and ending on 31st December, 2012 and the liability in that behalf can be discharged in the manner chosen by the assessee or as per his whims and fancies. Equally, the Revenue and its department cannot, by its whims and fancies, allow any defaulter to pay the taxes after the due date is over long time back. The plain duty of the departmental officials is to assess the tax payable and within the period prescribed by the statute. Any such scheme would not enable the authorities to extend the period of compliance stipulated by law and defer the tax liability indefinitely. It is not expected of them to show undue favour dehors the statute. The petitioners have to blame themselves and they cannot take advantage of their own wrong and force the respondents to accept the further sums in full and final settlement contrary to the stipulations and provisions in the scheme. Petition dismissed - decided against petitioner.
|