9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ased from M/s.Maruti Udyog Ltd on principal to principal basis. Alleging that the petitioner is liable to pay service tax under various heads to the tune of Rs. 5,10,91,364/- together with penalty and interest, the Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai issued show cause notice No.17/2015 dated 12.10.2015. The petitioner submitted their reply. Not satisfied with the same, the adjudicating authority by order dated 26.02.2018 confirmed the demand and also levied interest and penalty. The petitioner applied for rectification of the said order on the ground that it suffered from mistakes apparent on the face of record. The rectification petition dated 11.06.2018 was rejected as devoid of merits on 05.03.2019. 2. The petitioner did not file an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st the outstanding amount. The circular clarifies that the relief available under Section 124 (1)(c) will be applied to the net outstanding amount so arrived at. In respect of all other categories, any money paid before its appropriation is in the nature of a deposit only. Hence in respect of declarations made under these other categories, the relief will be applied to the outstanding amount and only thereafter the pre-deposits/deposits shall be adjusted. In the said circular, illustrations have also been given. In the light of the circular, according to the learned standing counsel, there is absolutely no merit in the petitioner's contention. He called for dismissal of this writ petition. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es; (ii)more than rupees fifty lakhs, then, fifty per cent of the tax dues; (b)where the tax dues are relatable to a show cause notice for late fee or penalty only, and the amount of duty in the said notice has been paid or is nil, then, the entire amount of late fee or penalty; (c)where the tax dues are relatable to an amount in arrears and,- (i) the amount of duty is, rupees fifty lakhs or less, then, sixty per cent of the tax dues; (ii) the amount of duty is more than rupees fifty lakhs, then, forty per cent of the tax dues; (iii) in a return under the indirect tax enactment, wherein the declarant has indicated an amount of duty as payable but not paid it and the duty amount indicated is,- (A) rupees fifty lakhs or le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of- (i) no appeal having been filed by the declarant against an order or an order in appeal before expiry of the period of time for filing appeal; or (ii) an order in appeal relating to the declarant attaining finality; or (iii) the declarant having filed a return under the indirect tax enactment on or before the 30th day of June, 2019, wherein he has admitted a tax liability but not paid it." "Tax dues" has been defined in Section 123 as follows : "123.For the purposes of the Scheme, "tax dues" means- (a) where- (i) a single appeal arising out of an order is pending as on the 30th day of June, 2019 before the appellate forum, the total amount of duty which is being disputed in the said appeal; (ii) more than one appeal arisin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be rendered meaningless. No part of the statute can be ignored by the Court. 8. The applicants seeking relief under the scheme can be classified into several categories. (I) those against whom show cause notice has been issued and adjudicating authority has not passed final order, (ii) those against whom final order has been passed and the matter is pending at the appellate stage, (iii) those against whom final order has been passed and who have not challenged the order. Such applicants even while contesting the cases against them would have made deposits. The case on hand does not fall under Section 124 (1) (a) or (b) of the Act. It falls only under Section 124 (1) (c) of the Act. If the tax dues is more than Fifty lakhs, then 40% of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been passed. The original authority had in fact directed the recovery officers to take into account the said claim. Having cleared his liability in part, now for the purpose of availing the benefit under the scheme, the petitioner cannot turn around and claim that what was paid by him was only "deposit" and not the tax amount. Even though I sustain the contention of the petitioner's counsel as regards the mode of calculation, still in the case on hand, it will not come to his rescue. The amount in arrears due from the petitioner was only Rs. 1,51,17,635/-. Therefore, 40% of the said amount is Rs. 60,47,054/-. The Designated Committee rightly applied the scheme provisions and granted relief to the petitioner. No interference is cal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
