9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (2) TMI 560 - HC - Service TaxSabkas Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 - petitioner failed to pay the declared amount within 30 days from the date of issue of notice and further did not pay the same within the extended due date on 30.06.2020 - whether the SVLDRS, 2019 can be made operational by the Court beyond the period for which it was formulated? - HELD THAT - The overwhelming view taken by the various High Courts is that time for availing of the benefit of the Scheme cannot be extended as a matter of course, especially beyond the period it was promulgated. The prayers made in this writ petition cannot be granted for consideration of the case of the petitioner for paying the service tax under the Scheme as the Court cannot make operational the SVLDRS, 2019, especially when the petitioner has approached this Court belatedly after 1 year and 3 months from the last date of payment of determined amount of tax under the SVLDRS, 2019 - Petition dismissed.
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the Court can direct the Respondents to accept the payment of taxes declared by the Petitioner under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (SVLDRS, 2019) after the expiration of the stipulated period. 2. Whether the Court can permit the Petitioner to deposit the determined amount under the SVLDRS, 2019 along with interest. 3. Whether the Court can direct the Respondents to consider the Petitioner’s representations for extension of time and payment in installments. Detailed Analysis: 1. Acceptance of Payment Post-Deadline: The petitioner sought a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to accept the payment of ?68,19,084/- under the SVLDRS, 2019. The petitioner declared an amount of ?1,13,65,141/- under the scheme, and the Designated Committee issued Form SVLDRS-3 on 13.03.2020, requiring payment within 30 days. The petitioner failed to make the payment within this period and the extended due date of 30.06.2020. The Court examined whether it could operationalize the SVLDRS, 2019 beyond its stipulated period. Various High Court judgments were considered, including Brahmaputra Tele Productions Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India, Agroha Electronics vs. Union of India, M/s Akshay Dan Charan vs. Union of India, P. Sikkandar vs. Government of India, and M/s Shekhar Resorts Limited vs. Union of India. The Court concluded that the overwhelming view is that the time for availing of the scheme cannot be extended beyond its promulgated period. 2. Permission to Deposit Amount with Interest: The petitioner also sought permission to deposit the determined amount along with interest. The Court noted that the SVLDRS, 2019 is a time-bound amnesty scheme with no provisions for extension of time or payment in installments after the deadline. The Court referred to the judgment in M/s Akshay Dan Charan’s case, where it was held that the scheme's time limit could not be extended, and the scheme would come to an end after the stipulated period. Similarly, in P. Sikkandar’s case, the Madras High Court had initially allowed an extension but later recalled the order, emphasizing the scheme's rigid timelines. The Court thus found no basis to permit the petitioner to deposit the amount with interest beyond the scheme’s deadline. 3. Consideration of Representations for Extension and Installments: The petitioner made multiple representations to the Respondents for an extension of time and payment in installments, which were rejected. The Court observed that the SVLDRS, 2019 did not provide for any extension of time beyond 30.06.2020. The Court referred to the judgment in Writ Tax No. 328 of 2021 by the Allahabad High Court, which stated that the scheme could not be made operational by the Court beyond its formulated period, nor could any conditions be relaxed. The Court held that it could not direct the Respondents to consider the petitioner’s representations for an extension or installments as it would contravene the scheme’s provisions. Conclusion: The Court dismissed the petition, holding that it could not make the SVLDRS, 2019 operational beyond its stipulated period or grant any extensions for payment. The petitioner’s delay of 1 year and 3 months from the last date of payment further weakened their case. The petition was dismissed with no merit, and all pending applications were disposed of.
|
