9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 425X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 125, as referred to above, wherein it has been mentioned that, who are all the eligible persons who can claim the benefit or to get a declaration for availing the benefit of the scheme - in the case in hand, admittedly, the petitioner filed an appeal on 20.06.2019 ie., 10 days prior to the cut off date before the CESTAT, therefore, on 30.06.2019, in the eye of law, there has been a litigation by way of appeal which has been filed and pending before the appellate forum. Whether the appeal filed on 20.06.2019 would be subsequently numbered or not is not the criteria, as the same has not been mentioned either under Section 124 or 125. Moreover, when there is a specific exclusion provided under Section 125, all other categories are eligible to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 39;Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, the petitioner made an application and based on such application, the respondent, who is the authority, under the scheme, to determine the amount payable by permitting the petitioner to avail the benefit under the scheme, has declared it as ₹ 7,32,236/-, by proceedings dated 22.01.2020. 3.However, subsequently by proceedings dated 27.01.2020, the petitioner having been considered to be under arrears category, the respondent has determined the amount payable by the petitioner as ₹ 13,24,448/-. Felt aggrieved over the said declaration made by the respondent treating the petitioner as under arrears category, whereby the higher amount has been determined by the respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been imposed under the scheme, especially, under Section 125(a) as referred to above, is that, those who filed appeal and the same had been heard finally, but orders were not passed as on 30.06.2019, shall not be eligible to claim any declaration under the scheme. By referring upon the said provision, learned Counsel would contend that, insofar as the petitioner's case is concerned, the appeal admittedly had been filed prior to the cut off date ie., 30.06.2019. Therefore, on 30.06.2019, though the appeal had been filed before the CESTAT, Chennai, the same had not been considered or heard finally as contemplated under Section 125 (1) (a). Therefore, the petitioner also shall be eligible to claim maximum benefit under the category of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding Counsel appearing for the respondent, who would submit that, though it was claimed by the petitioner that the appeal was filed before the CESTAT on 20.06.2019, unless and until the appeal is numbered and it is pending adjudication before any appellate forum like the CESTAT, then only he can be considered to be an eligible person to be categorised under the litigation category, otherwise, he can only be treated as an arrears category . As the appeal had been filed by him 20 days before, it cannot be taken as a pending appeal and therefore, the petitioner cannot be treated under the litigation category , for availing the maximum benefit under the scheme. Hence, a wrong declaration so made on 22.01.2020, has been rectified and according ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly numbered or not is not the criteria, as the same has not been mentioned either under Section 124 or 125. Moreover, when there is a specific exclusion provided under Section 125, all other categories are eligible to seek such declaration in view of the language used in Section 125(1) ie., all persons shall be eligible to make a declaration under this scheme except the following, namely; 11.Therefore, what are all the excluded category exclusively given in Clauses (a) to (h), alone shall be excluded from the purview of the eligible persons to seek a declaration and all the remaining persons certainly, will be eligible to claim. Therefore, Section 125 shall not be read in isolation and it should be read with Section 124, which makes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the following order: The impugned order is quashed. The respondent is hereby directed to treat the petitioner under the litigation category , and accordingly, the earlier order passed by the respondent dated 22.01.2020, whereby the amount of ₹ 7,32,236/- has been determined for payment shall be considered. In this context, it is further to be noted that during the pendency of the writ petition, pursuant to the orders passed by this Court, it is claimed by the petitioner that the said amount of ₹ 7,32,236/- as determined by the respondent, in entirety since has been paid, no further amount needs to be paid. Therefore, confirming the same, the petitioner's liability to pay the tax shall be declared accordingly. The n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
