9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 401X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... seeks to quash and set aside the OTS-5 rejection order issued by the Excise & Taxation Officer, DETC, Rewari, whereby the applications moved by the petitioner for one time settlement of outstanding dues under the Haryana One Time Settlement of Outstanding Dues Act, 2017 and Haryana One Time Settlement Scheme for Recovery of Outstanding Dues, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as the OTS Act, 2017 and OTS Scheme 2023), were rejected for the assessment years 2000-2001, 2001-2002, 2002-2003, respectively in the three writ petitions hereinabove. 2. For the purpose of adjudication CWP No. 27711 of 2024 is being taken as a lead case. The petitioner states itself to be a wholly owned subsidiary of Sony Group Corporation, Japan, engaged in manufactu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 04.03.2002 with the observation that the petitioner should make representation to the State Government seeking amendment of the notification dated 05.05.2000. Upon such a representation being made by the petitioner, wherein it claimed that components being used by it are same as used in the IT industry and, therefore, be given the benefit of notification no. 66 dated 05.05.2000, for exemption but its representation was answered with a memorandum issued on 20.05.2002 stating that the exemption is only for industries and not for any specific raw material. The petitioner preferred another CWP No. 8355 of 2002. The same was admitted by this Court. The earlier writ petition was declared as having become infructuous. This Court declined any inter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt had promulgated Haryana One Time Settlement of Outstanding Dues Act, 2017 and the Scheme for recovery of outstanding dues of 2023 wherein the petitioner applied for assessment for the years 2000-2001, 2001-2002 and 2002-2003 and deposited 40% of the total settlement amount as first installment. It filed the application disputing the entire tax under the Disputed Tax Category. The petitioner was, however, served with a deficiency notice informing that as per the OTS-1 application, the amount was to be treated as admitted tax instead of disputed tax as it would have to deposit 40% of the total amount. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since this Court in CWP No. 8355 of 2002 had stated all proceedings taken by the respond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons. 9. The OTS Scheme defines various provisions. Clause 2(a) and 2(e) of the OTS Scheme are as under:- "2 (a) "admitted tax" means any amount of tax as admitted in return but not paid or short paid; xx xx xx 2 (e) "disputed tax" means any amount of tax other than admitted tax, differential tax or undisputed tax." 10. As per Clause 4.1, an applicant opting for settlement of outstanding dues under the Scheme shall have to pay by way of settlement an amount in lieu of his outstanding dues as mentioned in Schedule-1. The Schedule-1 talks of following tax which is required to be payable as per the concerned category of tax:- 1 2 3 4 5 Serial Number Category Percentage of Tax or any other amount payable Percentage of interest a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le on goods imported out of India and Central Excise Duty applicable on goods purchased within India. Thereafter, the deductions were claimed under Section 5 of the Act and exemption under Section 11 of the Act on account of 24 items of raw material imported in local area terming them as consumed in information and technology products. The concerned assessing authority had rejected both the returns filed by the petitioner under Scenerio-1 and Scenerio-2 and held that the entry tax is levied on Scheduled goods either manufactured or produced within State or imported outside the country in the local area. It was also held that the assessee is not entitled to claim exemption under Section 11 of the Act and as such the claim of 24 items was als ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nted any interim relief, the amount has to be treated to be admitted tax to be paid by the petitioner in full. 16. We may also notice that if ultimately the petitioner's writ petition is dismissed, it would be the amount which has been already assessed that the petitioner would have to deposit and in One Time Settlement also the same would, therefore, be considered. However, if the writ petition is allowed, the petitioner can always claim refund. 17. Learned counsel has stressed on the words 'without prejudice', as mentioned in its returns filed in 2003. However, they would have no bearing to the present issue involved in the present writ petitions, which is only with regard to the OTS Scheme. In our view, the decision of the authorities, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
