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

2023 (2) TMI 669

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 6,021/-. Since the Scheme itself makes a provision for adjustment of any amount paid as pre-deposit and since it was the case of the Petitioner that the Petitioner demonstrated through evidence that an amount of Rs.55,06,021/- was already paid by the Petitioner and should have been considered as pre-deposit or deposit during the enquiry, the Designated Authority ought to have examined this aspect carefully. In a given case, if a declarant is able to show that deposit or pre-deposit, as the case may be, has been made, then such a declarant is entitled to an adjustment or reduction of the amount to be paid under the Scheme and for receipt of the discharge certificate in respect of the said amount. The failure of the Committee even to exami .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oner, a declarant under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, is before us making a grievance that the Petitioner is not given the benefit of the amount of pre-deposit made by the Petitioner during the inquiry and is made to pay an excessive amount for issuance of the discharge certificate. 3. The Petitioner provides manpower recruitment supply agency services. An investigation was carried out by Service Tax Commissionerate in respect of services provided by the Petitioner on the premise that the Petitioner was not disclosing service tax on the total consideration received, including wages of the manpower reimbursed. Five show cause notices were issued to the Petitioner that is for the period from January 2009 to Se .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt No.2- Designated Committee did not accept the calculation made by the Petitioner in SVLDRS-1 and issued SVLDRS-2 stating that the tax dues are Rs.87,47,432/-. The Petitioner filed a submission pursuant to the Form SVLDRS-2 pointing out that the Petitioner has already paid Rs.55,06,021/- for the period from October 23012 to March 2013, and the Petitioner should be given benefit thereof. The Petitioner was given an opportunity of personal hearing. Thereafter, Respondent No.2 issued Form SVLDRS-3 confirming the demand of Rs.87,47,432/-. According to the Petitioner, since the Scheme was closing, the Petitioner had no option but to pay Rs.87,47,432/- which the Petitioner did and was issued a discharge certificate through SVLDRS-4 on 8 May .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ount payable by the declarant. 5. In the reply affidavit filed by the Respondents, the factum of deposit of Rs.55,06,021/- is sought to be disputed. The Respondents have also raised a ground that the Petitioner had submitted a misdeclaration and, thus, is not entitled to the benefit of the scheme. It is stated that having submitted a misdeclaration of Rs.1,19,88,843/- instead of Rs.1,74,94,864/- and since the Petitioner has produced no evidence in respect of the deposit of Rs.55,06,021/-, the Petitioner is not entitled to any relief much less any relief of refund of the amount already paid in light of section 130 of the Act. 6. The Petitioner has sought to point out before us that the facts on record indicate that the amount of Rs.55, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Respondents have merely stated in the reply affidavit that the Petitioner has failed to prove the factual aspect of the deposit of Rs.55,06,021/-. The Designated Committee has also made no reference to the documents placed on record by the Petitioner, which the Petitioner had sought to bring to the notice of the Designated Committee. Since the Scheme itself makes a provision for adjustment of any amount paid as pre-deposit and since it was the case of the Petitioner that the Petitioner demonstrated through evidence that an amount of Rs.55,06,021/- was already paid by the Petitioner and should have been considered as pre-deposit or deposit during the enquiry, the Designated Authority ought to have examined this aspect carefully. In a giv .....

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