9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 726X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The circular says, dispute resolution and amnesty are the two components of the scheme. It is aimed at liquidating the legacy cases locked up in litigation at various forums, whereas the amnesty component gives an opportunity to those who have failed to correctly discharge their tax liability, to pay the tax dues. The circular also says, it may be appreciated that ambit of the scheme is very wide. Section 125 (1) in the Finance Act provides for eligibility of persons to make a declaration under the scheme. There has been no submission made to effect petitioner was or is ineligible to have applied under the scheme. The allegation against petitioner is, it did not make the deposit. That is the effect of forms SVLDRS-2 and 3. So in considerin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeared in this case: For Petitioner : Mr. J. Sahoo, Senior Advocate For Opposite Parties : Mr. T.K. Satapathy, Senior Standing Counsel JUDGMENT ARINDAM SINHA, J. 1. Mr. Sahoo, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, his client seeks mandamus commanding revenue to issue SVLDRS-4 (discharge certificate) in favour of his client. He submits, there stood issued show cause notice (SCN) dated 15th October, 2015 demanding Rs. 5,19,28,080/- as wrongly availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) during financial years 2010-11 to 2013-14. Adjudication pursuant to the SCN remained pending, when there was enactment by Parliament introducing Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 by Finance (no. 2) Act, 2019. His client ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t entitled to benefit of the scheme. There has been no deposit of tax as could be claimed to have been made under the scheme. To that effect SVLDRS-2 and 3 were duly issued. He relies on paragraph-7 in the counter to submit it is clear, where CENVAT matters are under dispute, same can be settled by paying applicable post-relief duty. In instant case, availing of ITC at Rs. 5,19,28,080/- has been questioned by the Department and hence, the SCN was issued. Petitioner did not deposit the tax. The matter was pending for adjudication. Petitioner opted for relief under SVLDR Scheme, 2019, in category of Litigation and was therefore required to pay 50% of the litigated amount. Petitioner s claim that it paid the entire disputed amount is a blatant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITC, we have to adjudicate whether it is entitled to issuance of discharge certificate SVLDRS-4. 7. For application of the scheme to petitioner, on its behalf there was reliance on clause (c) in paragraph-10 of the circular. The clause is reproduced below. (c) This Scheme provides for adjustment of any amount paid as pre-deposit during appellate proceedings or as deposit during enquiry, investigation or audit [Sections 124 (2) and 130 (2) refer]. In certain matters, tax may have been paid by utilizing the input credit, and the matter is under dispute. In such cases, the tax already paid through input credit shall be adjusted by the Designated Committee at the time of determination of the final amount payable under the Scheme. (emphasis supp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
