9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 502X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted the said amount by Challan dated 25.05.2023. By this payment, the principal amount payable under the scheme has been paid by the petitioner. The very nomenclature of the scheme would imply that the scheme has been introduced for the development of all. The petitioner has set out the reasons as to why he was unable to adhere to the schedule under the scheme. Therefore, taking into account the facts of this case and considering the fact that the amount due under the scheme has been paid, the interest of justice would be sub-served directing the petitioner to pay the interest at the rate of 15% from 01.10.2020 till the dates of respective payments. It is needless to state that the amounts paid prorata would be deducted for calculating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Joint Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Madurai, directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 69,08,453/- towards wrongly taken ineligible Cenvat credit and a sum of Rs. 16,00,666/- towards suppression of taxable value. Penalty of Rs. 85,09,119/- under Section 78 of the Finance Act r/w Rule 15 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, was also imposed apart from the interest on the service tax amount demanded. The petitioner would submit that although they had an appellate remedy, they were unable to avail the same on account of the COVID-19 lock down and by reason of the loss in business on account of demonetization etc., 4. It is the further case of the petitioner that in the meantime, the Central Government had come forward with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount of Rs. 14,78,471/- as per the amount due under the scheme. 6. It is the further case of the petitioner that since the time had lapsed, the third respondent had issued a letter dated 15.07.2022 directing the petitioner to remit a sum of Rs. 1,70,18,238/- along with interest, whereas under the scheme, they were liable to pay only a sum of Rs. 14,78,471/-. The petitioner had sent a representation dated 21.11.2022 requesting the respondents to receive the balance. However, by reply dated 30.11.2022, the respondents had expressed their inability to receive the same since the time given under the scheme had long expired. Therefore, left with no other alternative, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition. 7. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
