2021 (6) TMI 1153 - HC - Service Tax

Extension of the Amnesty Scheme - cap on the late fees to be collected - HELD THAT - In the present case, the facts would indicate that the petitioner has complied with the Scheme requirements substantially in time, except for last stage of remittance of the quantified amount, where there was a delay of 9 days. This is an issue which several assessees all over the Country are facing and it is time that the Board apply its mind to the same and came out with a viable solution. The petitioner is permitted to remit the amount quantified in Form 3 along with interest at the rate of 15%, in terms of Notification No.13 of 2016 dated 01.03.2016 and Section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 under which service tax is levied, from 01.07.2020 till date of remittance before the third respondent, within a period of one (1) week from today - List on 29.06.2021.

Summary

Issues:
- Mandamus to direct acceptance of payment under Sabka Vishwas Scheme
- Extension of payment deadline due to COVID-19 lockdown
- Compliance with Scheme requirements
- Precedent of Gujarat High Court and Supreme Court regarding similar cases

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought a mandamus to direct the Union of India to accept payment under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme for tax dues settlement. The petitioner had received a demand order, opted for the Scheme, and was issued necessary forms for the settlement process.

2. Due to the COVID-19 lockdown, the petitioner missed the payment deadline, which was later extended by the Department recognizing the difficulties faced by citizens. The petitioner expressed readiness to pay but faced technical issues with the payment portal after the extended deadline.

3. The Gujarat High Court and the Supreme Court have addressed similar cases, directing deposit of dues within a fixed timeframe and suggesting solutions for cases of delayed payments under the Scheme.

4. The High Court acknowledged that many taxpayers were facing challenges in meeting payment deadlines under the Scheme. The Board issued instructions to address such cases, indicating a possibility of accepting payments post-deadline with conditions like interest levies.

5. In a separate Supreme Court case, requests for policy changes related to GST Amnesty Scheme were not entertained, emphasizing that such matters involve policy decisions beyond the court's scope.

6. Considering the petitioner's substantial compliance with Scheme requirements and a minor delay in remittance, the Court allowed payment with interest within a week to demonstrate bona fides. The Court also urged the Board to find a comprehensive solution for similar cases nationwide.

7. The Court's order did not grant the relief sought by the petitioner but facilitated payment as a measure of goodwill. The respondents were directed to communicate the first respondent's decision on such matters before the next hearing date.

8. The case was scheduled for a further hearing on 29.06.2021 to review the progress and decisions made by the concerned authorities regarding accepting payments post-deadline under the Scheme.