TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of disputed tax arrears as reflected in the Bill was an enormous amount of Rs.9.32 lakh crores, which reflected approximately one year s direct tax collection. In the present case it can be seen that the Petitioner being eligible did apply for settlement of these disputes in terms of the Act. The Petitioner s eligibility therefore is not in dispute. It is true that the Petitioner did not deposit the entire amount which was determined as payable by Respondent No. 1 and which ought to have been paid before the specified date. The specified date earlier fixed as per the Act was 31st March, 2020. The Petitioner was required to pay an amount of Rs.8,39,676/- before the said date, however in case the payment was made after 01st April, 2020, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For the Respondents : Mr. Ajeet Manwani a/w Ms Samiksha Kanani. PER DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, J.: (ORAL) The Petitioner considering himself eligible for settlement of disputes under the Direct Tax, Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 ( the Act ) submitted Forms - 1 and 2 with Respondent No. 1 i.e. the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Thane. According to the scheme of the Act, Respondent No. 1 issued Form - 3 reflecting therein an amount of Rs.8,39,676/-, as the balance amount payable after taking into account and adjusting the amounts of refund etc. for the relevant assessment year 2013-14. This amount had to be paid on or before 31st March, 2021. After 31st March, 2021, the amount payable would be Rs.9,67,194/-. 2. The Pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orm - 3. 4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that repeated requests were made to Respondent No. 4 with regard to permitting the Petitioner to deposit the balance amount of Rs.300/- with a view to settle the disputes permanently and also emphasized the fact that the omission was in fact neither deliberate nor intentional, yet no response could be elicited based upon such applications. It is in this background that the present petition has been filed seeking a mandamus to Respondent No. 1 for purposes of allowing the Petitioner to pay the balance tax of Rs.300/- and further that the application filed by the Petitioner under the Act be accepted and a Form - 5 issued in that regard. A prayer is also made for purposes of condoning th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... As on the 30th November, 2019, the amount of disputed direct tax arrears is Rs. 9.32 lakh crores. Considering that the actual direct tax collection in the financial year 2018-19 was Rs.11.37 lakh crores, the disputed tax arrears constitute nearly one year direct tax collection. 2. Tax disputes consume copious amount of time, energy and resources both on the part of the Government as well as taxpayers. Moreover, they also deprive the Government of the timely collection of revenue. Therefore, there is an urgent need to provide for resolution of pending tax disputes. This will not only benefit the Government by generating timely revenue but also the taxpayers who will be able to deploy the time, energy and resources saved by optin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , if the payment is made on or before the 31st day of March, 2020. If payment is made after the 31st day of March, 2020 but on or before the date notified by Central Government, the amount payable shall be increased to 30 per cent of the disputed penalty, disputed interest or disputed fee, as the case may be. 4. The proposed Bill shall come into force on the date it receives the assent of the President and declaration may be made thereafter up to the date to be notified by the Government. It is thus clear that the spirit of the enactment was to unlock the amounts held up in disputes on account of pendency of various appeals filed by not only the tax payers but also the Government. The amount of disputed tax arrears as reflected ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ignificant and small. In fact on the face of it it is clear that the payment which was required to be paid in terms of Form - 3 was short only by Rs.300/-. This clearly appears to us to be an inadvertent error on the part of the Petitioner, which is neither deliberate nor intentional. Considering the purpose and spirit of the act, which was noting but to unlock the amount of disputed tax before various appellate fora as also put an end to litigation, we feel that issuing a writ of mandamus in the present case, directing the Respondents to accept the balance payment would be nothing but in furtherance of the object for which the Direct Tax, Vivad Se Vishwas Act was enacted. 10. We accordingly allow the present petition. The Respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
