Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (11) TMI 1094

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d-in-law. The Petitioner having made payment, even if, there was a delay for which reasons are mentioned in the Petition, Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 should have accepted the amount and issued Form No.SVLDRS-4. Section 128 the designated committee can modify its order only to correct an arithmetical error or clerical error which is apparent on the face of record. The remarks in the rectified Form No.SVLDRS-3, as mentioned above, by any stretch of imagination, can not be called an arithmetical or clerical error that was apparent on the face of record. On this ground also rectified Form No. SVLDRS-3 has to be set aside. In any event the details which have been referred to in the remarks column of rectified Form No. SVLDRS-3 were already ava .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... AT). Petitioner also deposited a sum of Rs.18,29,561/-. 3. In 2019 the Government of India came up with Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme (SVLDRS). Petitioner decided to avail of the scheme and filed declaration in Form No.SVLDRS-1 on 23 rd September 2019. Petitioner declared Rs.1,41,76,288/- as amount of tax dues. As per the scheme, the amount payable was fifty percent of the tax dues i.e. 70,88,144/-. This is not in dispute. In declaration in Form No.SVLDRS-1 filed by Petitioner, Petitioner declared a sum of Rs.18,29,561/- as the amount deposited by Petitioner earlier. Amount required to be paid by Petitioner under the scheme, therefore, was Rs.52,58,583/-. 4. On 28th November 2019, Respondent Nos.3 and 4 issued Form .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... revised . There was no response to this letter dated 13th February 2020. 8. It is Petitioner s case that on 22nd March 2020 complete nation-wide lockdown was declared due to Covid-19 pandemic, and since there was no response from Respondent Nos.3 and 4, Petitioner finally paid amount of Rs.8,41,497/- on 18th December 2020. It is Petitioner s case that there has been double payment, but nevertheless to put an end to the entire matter, Petitioner paid this amount. 9. Respondent Nos.3 and 4 have now rejected Petitioner s declaration on the ground that Petitioner did not pay this amount of Rs.8,41,497/- within 30 days of issuance of rectified Form No.SVLDRS-3 or within the extended period of 30th June 2020. 10. It is submitted that as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nder :- From a reading of the statement of object and reasons, it is quite evident that the scheme conceived as a one time measure, has the twin objectives of liquidation of past disputes pertaining to central excise and service tax on the one hand and disclosure of unpaid taxes on the other hand. Both are equally important: amicable resolution of tax disputes and interest of revenue. As an incentive, those making the declaration and paying the declared tax verified as determined in terms of the scheme would be entitled to certain benefits in the form waiver of interest, fine, penalty and immunity from prosecution. This is the broad picture the concerned authorities are to keep in mind while dealing with a claim under the scheme. 1 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed Form No.SVLDRS-3 was not valid Form since the same has been issued contrary to the provisions of Section 128. 17. Moreover under Section 128 the designated committee can modify its order only to correct an arithmetical error or clerical error which is apparent on the face of record. The remarks in the rectified Form No.SVLDRS-3, as mentioned above, by any stretch of imagination, can not be called an arithmetical or clerical error that was apparent on the face of record. On this ground also rectified Form No. SVLDRS-3 has to be set aside. In any event the details which have been referred to in the remarks column of rectified Form No. SVLDRS-3 were already available with Respondent Nos.3 and 4 before they issued original Form-3 where a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates