9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (8) TMI 1097 - HC - Service TaxRejection of application of Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme 2019 - resending amount back to the beneficiary - HELD THAT - This Court in M/S. SUBRAMANIYA SIVA CO. OPERATIVE SUGAR MILLS LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA THE DESIGNATED COMMITTEE (SABKA VISHWAS) THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GST CENTRAL EXCISE THE COMMISSIONER OF GST CENTRAL EXCISE STATE BANK OF INDIA 2022 (6) TMI 1055 - MADRAS HIGH COURT held that The facts on record indicate that the amount of Rs. 41, 331.20 was indeed paid by the petitioner which however was re-credited back due to technical glitches. Therefore the legitimate the benefit of the above scheme cannot be denied to the petitioner. Mistake is on account of the system evolved which failed to accept the payment. The issue is covered in favour of the petitioner and therefore the writ petition deserves to be allowed. At the same time a sum of Rs. 2, 83, 14, 2710/- has remained with the petitioner after an amount of Rs. 2, 83, 14, 330/- was debited from the petitioner s Account after cheque issued by the petitioner on 30.06.2020 was cleared and re-credited. Petition disposed off.
Issues involved:
The judgment involves a dispute related to the SVLDRS (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme Rules, 2019, where the petitioner sought to settle a tax dispute but faced issues with payment processing and re-credit of the amount. Issue 1: Payment Processing and Re-Credit: The petitioner filed a declaration under the SVLDRS Scheme Rules in December 2019. The Designated Authority issued an order requiring payment of Rs. 2,83,14,271. However, when the petitioner attempted to make the payment through RTGS, a technical issue arose. The bank re-credited the amount back to the petitioner's account due to a mismatch in the chalan amount. Despite multiple reminders from the petitioner, the authorities refused to resend the amount back to the beneficiary. Issue 2: Legal Arguments and Precedents: The petitioner relied on various legal decisions, including cases like Shekhar Resorts Ltd. vs. Union of India and Jai Guru Cables vs. Pr. Chief Commissioner of GST & C.Ex. Chennai, to support their claim that the benefit of the SVLDRS Scheme should be extended to them despite the payment processing issue. The respondents, however, argued that the scheme had expired, and the benefit could not be granted to the petitioner. Judgment: The court considered the arguments presented by both parties and referred to previous legal decisions. Citing the case of Subramaniya Siva Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. vs. Union of India, the court emphasized that technical glitches leading to payment re-credit should not deny the petitioner the benefits of the scheme. The court directed the authorities to accept the payment from the petitioner within 30 days to bring closure to the case. In line with the decision in Jai Guru Cables vs. PR. Chief Commissioner of GST & C.Ex. Chennai, the court highlighted that delays due to technical issues should not hinder the settlement process under the SVLDRS Scheme. Therefore, the court ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing them to pay the outstanding amount along with interest at 7.5% per annum within 45 days from the date of the order. The judgment concluded by disposing of the writ petition with the mentioned directions, without imposing any costs on either party.
|
