9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 679X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the declaration and give a counter-offer to the declarant of the correct amount. However, in this case, the Petitioner's application was thrown out at the threshold itself and, therefore, this stage did not arise. Today, the Scheme has come to an end and the Petitioner has stated that he is willing to substitute the figure of Rs. 28,72,603/- in place of Rs. 23,82,188/- and is willing to pay interest on the balance. In view thereof, we are of the view that Petitioner s declaration was rejected wrongly by invoking the provisions of Section 125 (1) (e) of the SVLDR Scheme. However, since the Petitioner is eligible and has now offered to pay the difference along with interest and in the light of subsequent fact that the Scheme has come ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n providing dry cleaning services. 5. On 28 June 2018, summons under Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 was issued to the Petitioner and a statement was recorded wherein the Petitioner admitted that the approximate service tax liability for the financial years 2014-2015 to 2017-2018 would be around Rs. 21.70 lakhs out of which he has been paid Rs.13 lakhs. On 15 April 2019, Petitioner informed the Respondents that he has paid total service tax liability of Rs.23.73 lakhs. 6. Meanwhile, SVLDR Scheme was introduced and the Petitioner made an application under the category investigation, enquiry or audit . In the said Form, the duty amount was mentioned at Rs. 28,72,603/- and the pre-deposit amount was mentioned at Rs. 23,82,188/-. The said a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is done at Rs. 28,72,603/- and therefore, he was considered as ineligible. However, as an officer of the Court he fairly agrees that there are decisions of this Court in favor of the Petitioner on this issue. He however prays that if the Petitioner s application is allowed then he should be called upon to pay the difference along with interest. 10. We have heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the Respondents and with their assistance have perused the documents brought to our notice. 11. Section 125 (1) of SVLDR Scheme provides that all persons shall be eligible to make a declaration under the Scheme, except those mentioned in clauses (a) to (h). The Respondents have invoked Section 125 (1) (e) for disqualifying the Petitioner on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed under Section 125 (1) (e) of SVLDR Scheme. 14. Under Section 126 of SVLDR Scheme, the Designated Authority has the power to verify the figures mentioned in the declaration and give a counter-offer to the declarant of the correct amount. However, in this case, the Petitioner's application was thrown out at the threshold itself and, therefore, this stage did not arise. Today, the Scheme has come to an end and the Petitioner has stated that he is willing to substitute the figure of Rs. 28,72,603/- in place of Rs. 23,82,188/- and is willing to pay interest on the balance. In view thereof, we are of the view that Petitioner s declaration was rejected wrongly by invoking the provisions of Section 125 (1) (e) of the SVLDR Scheme. However, s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
