9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 939X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e by the petitioner dated 14.11.2019 and 15.01.2020 in Form SVLDRS-1 filed by the petitioner under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (for short 'the SVLDRS'). 5. The brief facts of the case are as under : 5.1. The petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacture of various varieties of Yarns like POY and FDY and also other textile products. The petitioner was duly registered under the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944. As the petitioner was manufacturing the textile goods, the provisions of Textiles Committee Act, 1963 (for short 'the Act, 1963') were made applicable to the petitioner by the Textile Committee, Mumbai constituted under Section 3 of the said Act. 5.2. According to the petitioner, the provisions of the said Act and the Rules were not applicable to the manufacturing and business activities involving textile goods of the petitioner but the question whether the petitioner was obliged to comply with the provisions of the Act, 1963 and the Rules framed thereunder or not was subject matter of challenge before the Textiles Committee Appellate Tribunal formed under the said Act and the Rules. 5.3. It is the case of the petitioner that a d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Indirect Tax Enactments which were discontinued and subsumed under the provisions of the GST Act. 5.10. The petitioner therefore availed the benefit of the SVLDRS by filing Form SVLDRS-1 and Declaration made thereunder dated 14.11.2019 as the Appeal filed by the petitioner before the Appellate Tribunal under the Act, 1963 was pending on 30th June, 2019 and the amount of demand of Rs. 34,63,188/- was "tax dues" as per the SVLDRS. 5.11. The petitioner thereafter was served upon the letter from the Office of the respondent No. 2 issued on 09.12.2019 providing the date of hearing on 11.12.2019 calling upon the petitioner to show-cause as to why the application dated 14.11.2019, which appears to be liable for rejection, should not be rejected as the case of the petitioner was about recovery of Cess and being dealt by the Textiles Committee Cess Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai and therefore, the Designated Committee has no authority to grant relief in the case. 5.12. The petitioner thereafter filed a reply dated 26th December, 2019 contending that the Act, 1963 was one of the Enactments to which the SVLDRS was applicable as per the provisions of Section 122 of the Finance Act, 2019 and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 122. This Scheme shall be applicable to the following enactments, namely:- (a) the Central Excise Act, 1944 or the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 or Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 and the rules made thereunder; (b) the following Acts, namely:- (i) the Agricultural Produce Cess Act,1940; (ii) the Coffee Act, 1942; (iii) the Mica Mines Labour Welfare Fund Act, 1946; (iv) the Rubber Act, 1947; (v) the Salt Cess Act, 1953; (vi) the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act, 1955; (vii) the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957; (viii) the Mineral Products (Additional Duties of Excise and Customs) Act, 1958; (ix) the Sugar (Special Excise Duty) Act, 1959; (x) the Textiles Committee Act, 1963; (xi) the Produce Cess Act, 1966; (xii) the Limestone and Dolomite Mines Labour Welfare Fund Act, 1972; (xiii) the Coal Mines (Conservation and Development) Act, 1974; (xiv) the Oil Industry (Development) Act, 1974;(xv) the Tobacco Cess Act, 1975; (xvi) the Iron Ore Mines, Manganese Ore Mines and Chrome Ore Mines Labour Welfare Cess Act, 1976; (xvii) the Bidi Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1976; (xviii) the Additional ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid notice has been paid or is nil, then, the entire amount of late fee or penalty; (c) where the tax dues are relatable to an amount in arrears and,- (i) the amount of duty is, rupees fifty lakhs or less, then, sixty per cent. of the tax dues; (ii) the amount of duty is more than rupees fifty lakhs, then, forty per cent. of the tax dues; (iii) in a return under the indirect tax enactment, wherein the declarant has indicated an amount of duty as payable but not paid it and the duty amount indicated is,- (A) rupees fifty lakhs or less, then, sixty per cent. of the tax dues; (B) amount indicated is more than rupees fifty lakhs, then, forty per cent of the tax dues. Section 125. (1) All persons shall be eligible to make a declaration under this Scheme except the following, namely:- (a) who have filed an appeal before the appellate forum and such appeal has been heard finally on or before the 30th day of June, 2019; (b) who have been convicted for any offence punishable under any provision of the indirect tax enactment for the matter for which he intends to file a declaration; (c) who have been issued a show cause notice, under indirect tax enactment and the final h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt or CESTAT or the Commissioner (Appeals). Therefore, admittedly, clause (a) of Section 123 of the SVLDRS could not be applicable in the facts of the case of the petitioner to determine the tax dues. However, Sub-clause (b) of Section 123 of the SVLDRS refers to the show-cause notice under any of the Indirect Tax Enactment received by the declarant on or before 30th day of June, 2019. 11. In the facts of the case, the petitioner has received the show-cause notice in the year 2011 i.e. much prior to the 30th June, 2019 and it is not dispute that the Act, 1963 is an Indirect Tax Enactment as per the provisions of Section 122(b) of the SVLDRS to which the Scheme is applicable. Therefore, though the petitioner has claimed the benefit of the SVLDRS on the ground that the Appeal is pending, in fact the petitioner would be entitled to the benefit under the SVLDRS as per Clause (b) of Section 123 of the SVLDRS to quantify the tax dues. 12. Therefore, the question would arise that whether the petitioner is entitled to the relief available under the SVLDRS or not. Sub-section (1) of Section 124 of the SVLDRS provides for the relief available under the SVLDRS subject to the conditions spec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 121 (f) of SVLDRS so as to consider the tax dues as per Section 123 (a) (i) of SVLDRS. 14.3. In support of his submissions, reliance was placed on the decision of this Court in case of Sunflowers Developers Versus State of Gujarat rendered on 04.12.2019 in Special Civil Application No.19147 of 2019 with Special Civil Application No. 19152 of 2019 which was followed in the decision in case of Sky Industries Limited Versus State of Gujarat rendered on 07.06.2023 in Special Civil Application No. 246 of 2023. It was submitted that this Court while analysing the benevolent Amnesty Scheme under the VAT Act has considered the object of such scheme which was brought on statute to reduce the litigation on coming into force of the GST Act. 14.4. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the Bombay High Court in case of Star Television News Limited Versus Union of India rendered on 07.08.2019 in Writ Petition No.952 of 2008 wherein, the Bombay High Court after considering the various decisions of the Apex Court as well as the High Courts held that the provisions of Settlement Commission in Income Tax Act, 1961 have to be construed liberally on the ground that if a provision does no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dering the submissions made by the learned advocates for the parties, it appears that the respondent-Designated Committee is formed under the Rule-5 of the Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme (SVLDRS) Rules, 2019 for short (for short 'the Rules') under consist of Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax as the case may be and the Additional Commissioner or the joint Commissioner of the Central Excise and Service Tax as the case may be and as per the proviso, there shall be only one such Designated Committee in Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax. Therefore, the application filed on-line by the petitioner is required to be considered by the respondent No. 3-Designated Committee as per Rule 5 of the Rules. 17. The SVLDRS is part of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019 with an object to reduce the litigation of all other Acts which were subsumed under the GST Act and as per the provisions of Section 122 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019, all the Indirect Tax Enactments are covered for application of the Scheme which included the Act, 1963 also. 18. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore Versus J.H. Got ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income. The scheme of the Act as worked out has been noted before." 19. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of K.P. Varghese versus Income Tax Officer, Ernakulam and Another reported in 131 ITR 597 while considering the interpretation of statutory provisions has held as under : "The primary objection against the literal construction of s.52, sub-s. (2), is that it leads to manifestly unreasonable and absurd consequences. It is true that the consequences of a suggested construction cannot alter the meaning of a statutory provision but it can certainly help to fix its meaning. It is a well-recognised rule of construction that a statutory provision must be so construed, if possible, that absurdity and mischief may be avoided. It is a well settled rule of interpretation that the court should as far as possible avoid that construction which attributes irrationality to the Legislature." 20. This Court in case of Sunflowers Developers (Supra), while considering the applicability of the Amnesty Scheme under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 has observed as under : "15. In this backdrop, it may be germane to refer to the object behind the above referred amnesty scheme. The preambl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CC 665 wherein, it is held that provisions of Section 245-HA (1) (iv) of the Income Tax, 1961 was rightly held to be violative of Article 14 by the High Court but it did not invalidate the said provisions as it was possible to read down the provisions to avoid holding the provisions as unconstitutional. 22. Applying the conspectus of law, we are of the opinion that the SVLDRS being a Scheme framed by the Central Government in the Finance Act, the object of the Scheme is to reduce the litigation in view of the coming into force of the GST Act with effect from 01.07.2017 as such litigation was pertaining to the various Indirect Tax Enactments and by this SVLDRS, the tax payers were granted the relief as per the provisions of Section 124 and the petitioner was entitled to the benefit under the Scheme regarding the Cess levied under the Act, 1963 as the Scheme was made applicable to the said Act. Therefore, merely because the Appeal filed by the petitioner before the Appellate Tribunal under the said Act was not covered by the definition of Appellate Forum under Section 121 (f) of the Finance Act, the petitioner cannot be deprived of the benefits of the SVLDRS and the petitioner there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
