Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (6) TMI 184

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y held that Revenue recovered the entire amount by encashing bank guarantee on 13-10-2013 in view thereof it is not necessary to go into issue and we are of the opinion that having regard to the peculiar facts of this case and also that the appellant has some arguable case on merit interest of justice would be sub-served if no interest is demanded. The conclusion of the entire findings is that entire demand of interest was set aside. Even if overall circumstances are observed it is seen that whole case is based on the application made in KVSS 1998. As per the KVSS the 50% of duty, interest and penalty are liable to be waived as immunity provided under the scheme. The respondent is clearly eligible for the refund of interest recovere .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... led writ petition with Hon ble Bombay high court against the order of the Ld. Civil judge. The said writ petition was dismissed for the default in the year 2003. 2. In the intervening time, in the year 1998, the Government of India introduced an amnesty scheme known as Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 (KVSS ). The appellant applied for KVSS on 24.12.1998. Vide an order dt.24.02.1999, the department rejected the KVSS application on the grounds that the declaration filed is not against any SCN issued prior to 31.03.1998. The appellant filed a Writ Petition (No. 5412 of 1999) with Hon'ble Bombay High Court against the rejection of their application under KVSS. By a letter dated 15.07.1999, the Assistant Commissioner, Kalyan II Division, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appeal therefore Revenue is before me. 3. Shri Ajay Kumar, Ld. Addl. Commissioner(A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterating the grounds of appeal, submits that Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) has mis-interpreted the Order dated 8-10-2015 of the Supreme Court wherein Hon ble Supreme court clearly directed that revenue not to recover any further amount towards interest from the respondent. It clearly shows that direction is only not to recover the balance amount of interest however, there is no direction as regard the interest already recovered by the Revenue, therefore the impugned order has travelled beyond the direction of the Hon ble Supreme Court. He submits that respondent sought time to obtain clarification from the Hon ble Sup .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the respondent s case which was passed with reference to application filed under the KVSS 1998. The respondent against demand filed an application under KVSS 1998 for settlement of the dues. Such application was rejected by the Revenue saying that show cause notice as required under such scheme was never issued to the respondent. Against such order the matter was travelled via High Court to the Hon ble Supreme Court and the Hon ble Supreme court in civil appeal No.2819 of 2017 passed following order which is reported as 2015 (325) ELT 230 (SC):- Having regard to the nature of order which we propose to pass, it is not necessary to traverse through the facts in detail. Suffice it is to mention that there was a liability of tax in the su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e amount by encashing bank guarantee on 13-10-2013 in view thereof it is not necessary to go into issue and we are of the opinion that having regard to the peculiar facts of this case and also that the appellant has some arguable case on merit interest of justice would be sub-served if no interest is demanded. With the above order it is clear that in one hand Hon ble Supreme Court, discussed above, entire amount of duty encashed through bank guarantee and on the other hand it was clearly observed that peculiar facts is involved and case is arguable on merit therefore interest of justice would be sub-served if no interest is demanded. This clearly shows that entire interest amount is not recoverable by the Revenue from the respondent. Revenu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates