9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 939X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the petitioners for dues covered under the declaration filed by the petitioners under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme (For short "SVLDRS") under the Finance Act, 2019 (For short "the Act") in Form SVLDRS-1 dated 30.12.2019 by quashing and setting aside decision dated 19.03.2020 rejecting the declaration of the petitioner under the said Scheme by the respondent authorities. 5. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners during the period between April, 2014 to June, 2017 was liable for service tax for a sum aggregating to Rs.7,39,87,730.72 whereas the petitioner paid from time to time a total sum of Rs. 5,88,72,353/- for the said period and there was a short payment of service tax to the tune of Rs.1,51,15,377.72. 5.1) According to the petitioners, the short payment was for various reasons like genuine impression by the petitioner that certain activities were not chargeable to service tax and that service tax was payable when the clients paid price/value of the service with service tax amount to the petitioners in addition to certain commercial exigencies including severe financial liquidity crunch. 5.2) SVLDRS was introduced by Chapter-V of the Finance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o his notice the technical error on the website and also requested for solution in the matter. 5.10) On 1.07.2020 payment of Rs. 1.51 crores which was debited in the bank account of the petitioner on 30.06.2020 was transferred to the Government account apparently because there was no error any longer after evening of 30.06.2020. 5.11) The Superintendent of Designated Committee by letter dated 2.07.2020 in response to the letter dated 30.06.2020 filed by the petitioners informed the petitioners to communicate the grievance regarding any error to the CBIC Mitra Help Desk because the scheme was automated. 5.12) The petitioners thereafter, submitted letter dated 6.07.2020 before the Superintendent and informed that the payment was accepted on the portal and transferred to the Government account on 1.07.2020. 5.13) The petitioners also received a show cause notice dated 31.12.2020 for payment of Rs.6,69,05,723/- together with interest and penalty. 5.14) The petitioner between July 2020 to January 2021 personally contacted and requested the officer of the Designated Committee for issuing Discharge Certificate for concluding and settling the case of tax dues for which the declaration ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It was pointed out that the petitioners have deposited the amount of Rs.1,51,15,378/- as determined by the Designated Committee and mandate challan was generated on 30.06.2020. However, the attempt made by the petitioners to make payment electronically on 29th and 30th June 2020 was not successful and the amount was not transferred to the account of the Central Government till 1.07.2020 owing to technical glitches and system error which was brought to the notice of the concerned authority in writing immediately on 30.06.2020 itself by the petitioners. 6.2) Learned advocate Mr. Dave also referred to and relied upon the prima facie documentary evidence in form of bank statement to show that the payment was processed by the bank on 30.06.2020 but the amount was transferred in the Central Government account on the next date on 1.07.2020 because of the system error and therefore, the the action of rejecting the request to issue the Discharge Certificate on the ground that the payment was not made by the petitioners within the due date i.e. 30.06.2020 is without jurisdiction. 6.3) It was submitted that the limitation for depositing the requisite amount under the scheme was to expire o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te in Form SVLDRS-3 for payment of Rs. 1,51,15,378/- on 16.03.2020 and the petitioners on its own waited till the last date for making payment. 7.1) It was submitted that as per the proviso to section 126(1) of the Finance (No.2) Act 2019, it is clearly stipulated that no verification shall be made in case where a voluntary disclosure of an amount of duty has been made by the declarant. Therefore, the contention of the petitioners that on filing Form of SVLDRS-1 by the petitioners, there was no objection and no discrepancy in amount of tax etc. is baseless and meritless as the concerned authority i.e Designated Committee in cases of voluntary disclosure cannot verify the declaration made by the declarant as per the said provisions. 7.2) It was submitted that for making payment under SVLDRS, CBIC website contained a Tax Payers Manual wherein the manner of generation of challan and payment methods are explained with screenshots and Chapters 7 and 8 of the said Manual also explained the payment method. It was pointed out from Chapter 8 of the Manual provides that taxpayers will be able to make payments via NEFT/RTGS options only and that net-banking payment facility is not available ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e on which such payment was made was 1/7/2020, which was after the expiry of the last date on which the declared amount was to be paid in accordance with Rule 7 of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme Rules, 2019 as amended vide Notification No. 1/2020-Central Excise (NT) dated 14.5.2020 and therefore, application of the Petitioner was treated as lapsed and therefore, SVLDRS Form-4 (Discharge Certificate) was not issued for such application. The Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ), which were placed on the public domain, also clarified that in case of non-payment of amount within the stipulated time would render the application as lapsed. For ease of reference, the Question and Answer No. 58 of the FAQ is reproduced under: "Q58. What happens if I do not make the payment of the amount specified in the statement within 30 days of its issue? Ans. The declaration shall be treated as lapsed and benefits of the Scheme will no longer be available." Thus, vide letter dated 19/3/2020, at Annexure L of the Petition, it was informed to the petitioner that as payment was not made within due date ie. 30/6/2020, the application was treated as lapsed and no SVLDRS-4 can be issu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re required to make the payment of Rs. 1,51,15,378/- within 30 days i.e on or before 16.04.2020 which was extended due to Covid-19 pandemic by the Government upto 30.06.2020. 11. From the record, therefore, it emerges that the petitioners have paid the amount from its bank account on 30.06.2020. The petitioners are not at fault for amount not transferred in the account of the Government by the bank on the same day on 30.06.2020. The stand taken by the respondent authorities is therefore, not tenable as once the amount has been debited from the bank account of the petitioners on 30.06.2020, for all intent and purpose, it cannot be said that the petitioners have failed to deposit the amount as required under Rule 7 of the Rules. 12. We are therefore, of the opinion that the petitioners were not at fault for amount not being credited in the account of the Government on 30.06.2020. It is also not in dispute that there was only time lag between the amount debited in the account of the petitioners and credited in the account of the Government. It is admitted by the respondent authorities in paragraph no.10 of the affidavit in reply extracted here in above that it is not in disput ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
