9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 4X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cheme, then no appeal or revision should be pending. Therefore, the petitioner has moved the Tribunal to withdraw their appeals and after withdrawing the same, the petitioner has approached the first respondent for Samadhan Scheme. However, their plea was negatived, stating that no demand of penal interest is pending against the petitioner in view of the order passed in the revision petition, which, in the opinion of this Court, is not correct. In the case on hand, admittedly, original assessment was made much prior to the cut off date, ie., 01.04.2002, which is not disputed. Therefore, the arrears of tax, penalty or interest in respect of which the petitioner wanted to file an application, related to the assessment made much prior to 01 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich, on various dates during 2001 2002, according to the petitioner, adverse assessment orders came to be passed. Hence, the petitioner has preferred appeals before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT), Virudhunagar, in A.P.Nos.15,16, 113 204 of 2002, who, in turn, partly allowed the appeals, followed by which, the Assessing Officer has also passed orders giving effect to the appellate orders. Thereafter, the petitioner, though, has also paid the tax amount on 07.05.2005, has filed second appeals before Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Madurai, in M.T.A.Nos. 264, 265, 235 235 of 2005. 3.2. In the meantime, the second respondent has issued demand notice in Form 29, demanding penal interest for the be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t writ petitions came to be filed. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the revisional authority has set aside the demand of penal interest and remanded the matter, with a direction to the Assessing Officer to wait till the disposal of petitioner's appeals before the Tribunal. That does not mean that the penal interest is wholly set aside or deleted. It is just postponed and in the event of the petitioner losing the appeals, penal interest should be payable by the petitioner. This is nothing but Sword of Damocles hanging over them. Therefore, in order to give a quietus to the issue, the petitioner has opted for Samadhan Scheme, however, the same came to be negatived, without even hearing the petitioner. Hence, h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... revision and after such disposal, it shall be calculated on the amount that becomes due. For better appreciation, the Second proviso to Section 24(3) is extracted thus: Section 24(3): .. Provided further that where a dealer or person has preferred an appeal or revision against any order of assessment or revision of assessment under this Act, the interest payable under this subsection, in respect of the amount in dispute in the appeal or revision, shall be postponed till the disposal of appeal or revision, as the case may be, and shall be calculated on the amount that becomes due in accordance with the final order passed on the appeal or revision as if such amount had been specified in the order of assessment or revision of assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f hank yarn obligation. 10. A bare reading of the proviso and the revision order would make it crystal clear that the demand is only postponed and not completely deleted, as rightly contended by the petitioner. 11. Section 4 of the Act reads thus: Subject to the other provisions of this Act, an applicant may make an application for Settlement of Arrears of tax, penalty or interest in respect of which assessment has been made under the relevant Act, prior to the 1st day of April 2002, against which an appeal or revision is not pending before any court on the date of filing application. A reading of the above would clearly show that if a person wants to enroll himself/herself under Samadhan Scheme, then no appeal or revision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to 01.04.2002 alone is eligible for settlement and in this case, though assessment has been completed prior to the crucial date, demand and levy of interest accrued only on 07.05.2005. This Court is not inclined to accept this stand. This is because, when an assessment order is set aside and remanded, the fresh order passed would, in fact, substitute the original order. The date of the fresh order, merely because it was passed after the remand, cannot deprive the benefits of any Scheme to the aggrieved persons, which were available to similarly placed persons. 14. In the case on hand, admittedly, original assessment was made much prior to the cut off date, ie., 01.04.2002, which is not disputed. Therefore, the arrears of tax, penalty or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
