9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 819X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is, therefore, left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. The petitioner clearly stated that the tax liability is being discharged by it voluntarily and requested the respondents not to issue any Show Cause Notice in relation to the search and seizure undertaken by it on 04.03.2021. Clearly therefore, the tax amount has been deposited by the petitioner voluntarily and the case of coercion now being set up by the petitioner is an afterthought. The effect of Subsection (5) and (6) of Section 74 of CGST Act is that the assessee can by making voluntary deposit of tax, interest and penalty avail the benefit of restriction of penalty to only 15% of such tax. In the present case, the petitioner availed of this remedy and based thereon, proceedings against the petitioner arising out of the search and seizure activities carried out on 04.03.2021 were closed. The petition is dismissed with costs quantified at ₹ 25,000/- to be deposited with Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee. - W.P.(C) 13034/2021 - - - Dated:- 18-11-2021 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA Petitioner Through : Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Adv. R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o.3 had no authority to seize cash. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that on 04.03.2021, the respondents directed Mr.Puneet Bhudhiraja, the Director of the petitioner company to accompany the search party to respondent s office at CR Building, IP Estate, New Delhi without issuing any summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act. Mr. Budhiraja was illegally detained overnight in the office without any lawful justification and was released from unlawful custody only in the afternoon of 05.03.2021. She submits that due to coercive action of the respondents, an amount of ₹ 33,99,236/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lakhs Ninety Nine Thousand Two Hundred Thirty Six Only) was deposited by the petitioner with the respondents on 09.03.2021. 6. The petitioner thereafter sought release of the cash amount illegally seized from the petitioner, however, the respondent no.1 vide impugned letter dated 24.03.2021 directed the release of the amount only for payment of Government dues. She submits that the said condition is extraneous to the provisions of the CGST Act and cannot be sustained. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d penalty voluntarily . It was pursuant to this request that the impugned letter dated 24.03.2021 was issued to the bank directing release of the fixed deposit of ₹ 65 lakhs to the petitioner, albeit for payment of Government dues only. The petitioner never challenged the said condition and in fact voluntarily deposited the balance tax, interest and penalty amount of ₹ 60,66,082/- with the respondents on 25.03.2021. It was on this deposit that the proceedings against the petitioner were closed under Section 74(5) of the CGST Act. He submits that the above documents have been intentionally concealed from this Court to set up a false case of coercion and the present petition, therefore, is liable to be dismissed on this short ground itself. 12. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties. 13. At the outset, we note that the petitioner has not disclosed in the petition the letter dated 24.03.2021 by which it had sought the release of the amount of ₹ 65 lakhs seized from the residential premises of its director Mr.Puneet Budhiraja on 04.03.2021. The said letter is reproduced as under: With due respect, I Puneet Bhudhiraj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same need not be adjudicated by us in the present petition for the reason that it is an admitted fact that on the basis of the representation/letter dated 24.03.2021 referred hereinabove, the cash amount so seized was released in favour of the petitioner. The said question, therefore, in the present petition is merely of an academic importance and is, therefore, left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case. 17. As far as the condition of release of the amount is concerned, it is again admitted that based on the release of the amount, the petitioner went ahead and deposited an amount of ₹ 60,66,082/- with the respondents towards its balance tax, interest and penalty outstanding. This issue is therefore, only of academic importance and in any case, due to the letter dated 24.03.2021 of the petitioner itself submitting to such condition, cannot be allowed to be agitated by the petitioner. 18. As far as the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that amount of ₹ 94,65,318/- deposited by the petitioner with the respondent was not voluntary but due to exercise of coercion, we find no merit in the same. Admittedly, an amount of ₹ 33,99,236/- wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1,333,918 1,33,918 585,441 585,441 9,465,316 DRC-03 FILING We have paid the following taxes vide DRC-03, the information is as follows: 1. Vide Debit Entry No.DC0703210032129 dated March, 9, 2021 following tax was paid for FY 2020-21 (Annexure 1) : Type Tax Interest Penalty Total CGST 972,736 2,617 309,357 12,84,710 SGST 972,736 2,617 309,357 12,84,710 Total 25,69,420 2. Vide Debit Entry No.DC0703210032153 dated March, 9, 2021 following tax was paid for FY 2019-20 (Annexure 2): Type Tax Interest Penalty Total CGST ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the tax amount has been deposited by the petitioner voluntarily and the case of coercion now being set up by the petitioner is an afterthought. This is also evident from the letter dated 18.08.2021 filed by the petitioner alongwith the present petition, the relevant portion of which is reproduced herein below: Ref : In reference to search conducted dated 4.3.2021, under GST Act, on M/s Vijay Steelcon Pvt. Ltd. At D5A/1, Ground Floor, Shiv Puri Extension, Chander Nagar, East Delhi-110051, GSTIN:07AABCV0083E1ZN In this regard it is humbly submitted that the brief facts of the case are that on 4th March, 2021, a search was conducted under the GST Act on M/s Vijay Steelcon Pvt. Ltd. (herein after referred as assessee company ). That to buy peace of mind and to avoid any dispute or coercion with the GST Department, assessee company paid some taxes amounting to ₹ 5629800/- in DRC -03 to the GST Department. However, later on after seeking legal opinion from some consultants in the matter, some glaring facts have surfaced and consequentially it has come to light that some excess taxes have inadvertently been paid by the assessee, which though cannot be levied as per wel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
