9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 935X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r was indeed entitled to avail the benefits of the aforesaid schme under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, as the petitioner was in arrears of tax. Originally as per the scheme, the amount was to be paid by 31st December, 2019. However, the date was extended and the time limit was extended up to 30.06.2020. In this case, the petitioner also paid the amount on the last date by debiting the amount electronically from his bank account. However, after the amount was debited from the petitioner's bank account, it was re-credited back due to technical glitches. The question therefore raises whether under these circumstances the benefit of the aforesaid scheme can be denied to the petitioner - The scheme is intende ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 97.20/- paid by the petitioner under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. 3.The said scheme was announced by the Parliament in the Finance Act, 2019 and gave rights to the chronic defaulters to settle the dispute once for all. It appears that the petitioner had suffered an adverse order dated 26.12.2011 in original No.MAD-CEX-000-ASC-021-11. The petitioner however did not file further appeal against the said order of the original authority. Thus, the petitioner was required to pay a sum of ₹ 4,94,274/- towards tax for the services provided by the petitioner and further penalty of ₹ 5,07,274/- totalling to a sum of ₹ 9,13,730/-. 4.The petitioner offered to settle the dispute by filing declaratio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, on the next day, that is, on 01.07.2020, the petitioner made further attempt to make the payment of ₹ 1,51,797.20/~and this amount, infact has been debited from the account of the petitioner, however, on the next day, that is, on 02.06.2020, it has been again re~credited in the account of the petitioner. Therefore, these consistent efforts taken by the petitioner, ofcourse, during the last minute, cannot be disputed. 21.In this regard, it is further to be noted that, the very scheme itself is only to give solace to those, who are in default of tax arrears, and in order to make the One Time Settlement, these type of schemes are being introduced and implemented by the Central Government/Revenue to collect more tax and revenue w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns stated in this regard once again, despite the direction given by this Court in the earlier round of litigation, cannot be justifiable. 24.In view of the above, this Court to inclined to dispose of this writ petition with the following orders: that the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration. While reconsidering the same, the afore~stated factual matrix shall be borne in mind by the empowered Committee and accordingly, the pragmatic decision shall be taken by taking into account the very purpose of the scheme being introduced and implemented and accordingly, orders to that effect shall be passed. 25.With these directions this writ petition is disposed of. However, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned counsel for the respondents submits that the aforesaid scheme was a time bound scheme and since the petitioner failed to pay the amount in time as per the scheme and as per the extension given by the Government, the petitioner was not entitled to settle the dispute under the aforesaid scheme and therefore, the learned counsel prays that the writ petition filed by the petitioner is liable to be dismissed. The learned counsel for the respondents referred to the decision of this Court in W.P.No.5409 of 2021 (Convenant Insurance Surveyors and Loss Assessors Private Limited, Chennai Vs. The Designated Committee, Chennai and another) dated 30.11.2021, wherein under a similar circumstances, the relief was not granted. 11.I have conside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Court has opined to accept the said order of the Hon'ble Court. 15.The scheme is intended to allow chronic defaulters to pay the amount and buy peace. The delay in payment on account of technical glitches cannot come in the way of the petitioner to settle the dispute. I am therefore inclined to allow this writ petition. For the same reason I am not able to accede to the views of this Court in W.P.No.5409 of 2021 (Convenant Insurance Surveyors and Loss Assessors Private Limited, Chennai Vs. The Designated Committee, Chennai and another) dated 30.11.2021. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that there is no justification in not accepting the declaration of the petitioner under the scheme or in not accepting the payment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
