TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 814X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unambiguous especially in taxation matters. The scheme in question is not a piece of taxation legislation, instead, it is a piece of beneficial legislation for Union as well dealers/assessee. The Government is getting revenue without litigation and assessee is getting immunity from partial tax liability as well as interest and penalty, thus there is win-win situation for both sides. The Amnesty Scheme was launched to minimize litigation and respondent seems to unnecessarily dragging the matter. The hyper technical approach of the officials/authorities is contrary to the intent and purport of the beneficial scheme and the mandate of the Parliament. The Finance Act has excluded various categories of persons from the scheme and it is undisputed that petitioners fall within category of eligible persons. It is settled law even under taxation that if a person is eligible to one or another benefit, he should not be denied said benefit on procedural or technical grounds. The requirement of strict compliance of conditions is necessary to ascertain eligibility, however procedural formalities need not to be strictly complied with. Filing of one or more declarations has been prescribed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax alongwith interest and further imposed penalty. The respondent issued 5th Show Cause Notice dated 27.12.2018 (Annexure P-6) for the period October, 2016 to June, 2017. The petitioner preferred single appeal against common Order-in-Original dated 18.04.2018 (P-7) before Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short Tribunal ). During the pendency of appeal before the Tribunal, the petitioner deposited entire amount of service tax as confirmed by aforesaid Order-in-Original. The respondent filed cross appeal against same Order-in- Original whereby partial demand was confirmed. 3. For the liquidation of pending disputes and realize outstanding tax/arrears, the respondent through Finance Act, 2019 introduced Amnesty Scheme known as Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. The petitioner filed two applications under Amnesty Scheme seeking waiver of interest and penalty because 100% amount of tax stood already paid. One application dated 24.12.2019 was filed with respect to appeal pending before Tribunal and another dated 24.12.2019 for 5th pending Show Cause Notice dated 06.03.2019. 4. The Designated Committee constituted under Amnes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order-in-original. 6. Counsel for the respondent contended that as per different judgments of Hon ble Supreme Court including judgment in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Versus ACIT-Manu/ID/0462/2016, Hemalatha Gargya Versus CIT (2003) 259 ITR 1 (SC), rule of strict interpretation would apply and there is no equity in taxation. The respondent authorities cannot be directed to act contrary to law. The Designated Authority which is creature of Statute cannot act beyond the provisions of the Scheme. The language of Rule 3(2) is quite clear and unambiguous, thus there is no question to look into intention of the legislature. Section 125(2) of the Finance Act, 2019 provides that declaration shall be made in such electronic form as may be prescribed and Rule 3(2) has prescribed separate declaration for each show cause notice, thus declaration has been rightly rejected. 7. Having scrutinized the rival arguments and the record of the case, we find that issue involved is no more res integra. The Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 10804 of 2020 has dealt with question in hand and vide order dated 25.09.2020 has in relevant Paras 6 to 14 held as under:- 6. Accordingly, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sent case the Petitioner's application ought not to have been rejected only on the ground that one declaration, and not four, was filed on 30th December, 2019. 13. In addition to this, the Court notes that the Respondents have not disputed the averment of the Petitioner that if four separate declarations were to be filed, the Petitioner might have to pay only ₹ 13,34,110/-, whereas in terms of the declaration now filed, the Petitioner has agreed to pay ₹ 26,68,220.50. 14. For all the aforementioned reasons, the impugned order dated 21st February, 2020 is hereby set aside. A direction is issued to the Respondents to decide the Petitioner's declaration/application in form SVLDRS 1 afresh within a period of eight weeks and communicate the decision thereon to the Petitioner within one week thereafter. Counsel for the respondent on being confronted could not differentiate facts of present case from aforesaid judgment of this Court, however pleaded that department is in the process of filing SLP before Hon ble Supreme Court. Mere intention to file SLP or filing of SLP is no ground to keep the matter pending or form any opinion different from opinion of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs. The scheme in question is not a piece of taxation legislation, instead, it is a piece of beneficial legislation for Union as well dealers/assessee. The Government is getting revenue without litigation and assessee is getting immunity from partial tax liability as well as interest and penalty, thus there is win-win situation for both sides. The Amnesty Scheme was launched to minimize litigation and respondent seems to unnecessarily dragging the matter. The hyper technical approach of the officials/authorities is contrary to the intent and purport of the beneficial scheme and the mandate of the Parliament. The Finance Act has excluded various categories of persons from the scheme and it is undisputed that petitioners fall within category of eligible persons. It is settled law even under taxation that if a person is eligible to one or another benefit, he should not be denied said benefit on procedural or technical grounds. The requirement of strict compliance of conditions is necessary to ascertain eligibility, however procedural formalities need not to be strictly complied with. Filing of one or more declarations has been prescribed by Rules whereas conditions of eligibility h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
