9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (1) TMI 1351 - HC - GSTTransition of CENVAT credit under the new regime in terms of Section 140 of CGST Act 2017 - amount involved was more than Rs. 50 lakhs - whether the petitioner is entitled to settle the dispute under SVLDR Scheme 2019 under the aforesaid category viz. Investigation enquiry or audit Category ? - HELD THAT - The petitioner was barred from filing the application / declaration under the SVLDRS Scheme 2019 in view of Section 125(1)(e) of The Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme 2019. as there was no quantified. If indeed there was a quantification a Show Cause Notice No.4/2020-(ADC) dated 19.02.2020 would have been issued to the petitioner within the period of 35 days from 14.01.2020 the date of the declaration filed by the petitioner in Form SVLDRS-1. On the date of hearing when the case was reserved for orders on 10.07.2023 the respondent has filed a copy of Order in Original No.24/2023-GST(ADC) dated 31.03.2023. wherein the demand proposed in SCN No.4/2020(ADC) dated 19.02.2020 has confined the demand. The petitioner was not entitled to settle the dispute under the aforesaid scheme although the Designated Committee of the 1st respondent has concluded that the Committee examined the case and found that an amount of Rs. 8, 36, 913/- was paid towards interest and the SVLDRS scheme does not allow the set off of interest against duty liability. Accordingly the Committee decided to accept only the pre deposit of duty of Rs. 20, 76, 274/- towards pre deposit. The Division Bench of this Court in M/s.Win Power Engineering (P) Ltd. Represented by its Director T.K.Kumar Vs. The Designated Committee Sabka Vishwas Legacy Disputes Resolution Scheme 2019 2022 (12) TMI 603 - MADRAS HIGH COURT has held The question of issuing statement by the Committee under Section 127 read with Rule 6 of the SVLDRS Rules 2019 would arise only where the application filed itself falls within the four corners of Section 124(1)(d) as extracted above. Only where there was quantification of tax or duty in arrears the scheme was applicable. There is no merits in this writ petition. The Writ Petition has to therefore fail and is liable to be dismissed. The Writ Petition accordingly stands dismissed.
Issues Involved:
1. Eligibility of the petitioner to file a declaration under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. 2. Quantification of duty before the cut-off date of 30.06.2019. 3. Set-off of interest against duty liability under the SVLDRS Scheme. 4. Jurisdiction and applicability of the SVLDRS Scheme to the petitioner's case. 5. Issuance of Show Cause Notice and subsequent demand. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Eligibility of the petitioner to file a declaration under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019: The petitioner filed Form SVLDRS-1 under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, on 14.01.2020, under the "Investigation, enquiry or audit" category. The respondents rejected the application, citing that the petitioner was not entitled to settle the dispute under the scheme as the amount declared pertained to CENVAT wrongly availed, which is covered under the scope of 'indirect tax enactment' as per Section 122(a) of the Scheme. 2. Quantification of duty before the cut-off date of 30.06.2019: The petitioner had transitioned Input Tax Credit under Section 140 of the CGST Act, 2017. However, the Audit Wing raised queries and informed the petitioner on 17.12.2018 that an amount was wrongly transitioned. The petitioner reversed part of the credit before 30.06.2019. The court noted that the communication dated 17.12.2018 was merely a request for updating the worksheet and did not constitute final quantification. The Show Cause Notice issued on 19.02.2020 further confirmed that there was no proper quantification before the cut-off date. 3. Set-off of interest against duty liability under the SVLDRS Scheme: The respondents rejected the petitioner's application, stating that the SVLDRS Scheme does not allow the set-off of interest against duty liability. The Committee decided to accept only the pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 20,76,274/- towards pre-deposit, rejecting the interest amount paid by the petitioner. 4. Jurisdiction and applicability of the SVLDRS Scheme to the petitioner's case: The court referenced Section 125(1)(e) of the Finance Act (No.2) Act, 2019, which states that a person subjected to an enquiry, investigation, or audit, where the amount of duty involved has not been quantified on or before 30.06.2019, is not eligible to make a declaration under the Scheme. The court also cited the Division Bench's decision in M/s.Win Power Engineering (P) Ltd., which emphasized the necessity of quantification before the cut-off date for eligibility under the Scheme. 5. Issuance of Show Cause Notice and subsequent demand: A Show Cause Notice dated 19.02.2020 was issued to the petitioner, demanding Rs. 31,23,18,218/-. The court noted that the issuance of the Show Cause Notice within 35 days of the petitioner's declaration further indicated that there was no proper quantification before 30.06.2019. The court concluded that the petitioner was barred from filing the application under the SVLDRS Scheme due to the lack of quantification. Conclusion: The court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the petitioner was not entitled to settle the dispute under the SVLDRS Scheme, 2019, due to the absence of proper quantification before the cut-off date. The court granted the petitioner liberty to file an appeal against the Order in Original dated 31.03.2023 within 30 days from the receipt of the order. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
|
