9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit the amount of ₹ 55,56,045.00 with the revenue within a period of one week from today. The order dated 23.6.2020 records the last date for making payment was likely to be extended further beyond 30.6.2020, however we are not being informed of the same today. We permit the petitioner to deposit the same within a period of one week from today. Petition disposed off. - WRIT PETITION NO. 3510 OF 2019 - - - Dated:- 30-6-2020 - K.K. TATED MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. Mr. Prasannan Namboodri for the Petitioner Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly, Sr. Counsel a/w Mr. Jitendra B. Mishra for the Respondents Mr. Abhay Patki, Addl. G.P. for the State ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 26,967.00 as worked out and recoverable from the petitioner under the provisions of Section 11A(4) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. (c) The petitioner filed application dated 20.7.2018 before the Settlement Commission, which was rejected by order dated 7.8.2018 and liberty was granted to the petitioner to approach the Settlement Commission after compliance of the conditions under Section 32 E of the Act. (d) By order dated 31.1.2019, the Settlement Commission confirmed the payment of central excise duty amounting to ₹ 1,66,26,967.00 sought to be recoverable from the petitioner. (e) Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed appeal against the above order before the Commissioner (Appeals). In the meanwhile, the petitioner als ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ifying the estimated amount payable under the Scheme at ₹ 55,56,045.00. (k) The petitioner, being aggrieved, has filed the present petition. 4. Mr. Prasannan Namboodri, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has painstakingly argued that the present petition involves interpretation of the provisions of Section 123(a) read with Section 124(1)(a) and Section 124(2) of the Finance Act, 2019 to the facts and circumstances of the petitioner's case. He submitted that the petitioner had already made a pre-deposit, which amount being already deposited earlier in point of time was required to be deducted from the amount payable which was arrived at after deducting the relief from the tax due. He submitted that the t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d application of the admitted central excise duty liability. He submitted that the liability as per the order in original had been accepted by the petitioner without litigating and therefore, the same should not be considered under the Scheme either as arrears or under litigation. 6. Mr. Namboodri in rejoinder vehemently opposed the submissions made on behalf of the revenue and contended that the case of the petitioner is required to be considered in the light of the provisions of Section 123(a) read with Section 124(1)(a) of the Finance Act, 2019 and it is true and correct interpretation. 7. Without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties, it was submitted that the last date for making payment was extended upto 30.6.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax dues; (ii) more than rupees fifty lakhs, then, fifty per cent of the tax dues; ....... ....... (2) The relief calculated under sub-section (1) shall be subject to the condition that any amount paid as predeposit at any stage of appellate proceedings under the indirect tax enactment or as deposit during enquiry, investigation or audit, shall be deducted when issuing the statement indicating the amount payable by the declarant: Provided that if the amount of predeposit or deposit already paid by the declarant exceeds the amount payable by the declarant, as indicated in the statement issued by the designated committee, the declarant shall not be entitled to any refund. 9. After hearing the learned counsel for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e petitioner under SVLDRS-3, determine the excise duty payable and pass a fresh order in Form No. SVLDRS-3 and intimate the same to the petitioner in accordance with law; (e) If respondent No. 3 Committee comes to the conclusion that the balance liability of the petitioner towards payment of excise duty is less than ₹ 55,56,045.00, in that event, the differential amount of deposit made by the petitioner under this order and the duty determined shall be immediately refunded to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of passing of the fresh SVLDRS-3 order. 12. Petition is disposed of on the above terms with no order as to costs. 13. This order will be digitally signed by the Personal Assistant / Private Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
