TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court quashes SVLDRS Forms, grants Discharge Certificate emphasizing correct scheme application</h1> <h3>M/s. Pierian Services Pvt. Ltd. Versus Designated Committee Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Bengaluru, Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs New Delhi, Union Of India Ministry Of Finance</h3> M/s. Pierian Services Pvt. Ltd. Versus Designated Committee Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Bengaluru, Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And ... Issues:Challenge to SVLDR Scheme Statements and Discharge Certificate issuance.Analysis:The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash SVLDR Scheme Statements issued by the Designated Committee and to direct issuance of a Discharge Certificate under the SVLDR Scheme. The petitioner was initially issued a Show Cause Notice for a tax demand, followed by an Order-in-original calling for payment. The petitioner filed an appeal before CESTAT and simultaneously filed a declaration under the SVLDR Scheme. The crux of the dispute lies in the discrepancy between the tax amount paid by the petitioner and the amount considered by the Designated Committee in the SVLDRS-2 and SVLDRS-3 forms. The petitioner argued that the Forms did not consider the actual tax deposit, as recorded in the Audit Report. The petitioner contended that the Committee should have verified records before issuing the Forms to ensure correct tax relief entitlement under the Scheme.During the proceedings, the respondent argued that the petitioner admitted to paying a specific tax amount in the appeal memorandum before CESTAT, which was considered in the SVLDRS Forms. The respondent contended that the petitioner cannot now dispute the amount paid based on previous documents. The petitioner, in response, highlighted the technical approach taken by the Committee and emphasized the need for proper verification of records to ensure accurate tax relief under the SVLDR Scheme.The core issue revolved around whether there was a genuine dispute regarding the service tax deposited by the petitioner and if the petitioner was entitled to Tax Relief under the SVLDR Scheme. The Court examined the remarks in the impugned Forms and concluded that the Order-in-original did not address the tax paid, only the liability amount. The Court noted the discrepancy between the tax amounts mentioned in various documents and upheld the petitioner's claim for Tax Relief based on the undisputed deposit of duty and the disputed liability amount. The Court emphasized the importance of correctly applying the provisions of the SVLDR Scheme to ensure declarants receive entitled relief without technical hindrances.Ultimately, the Court allowed the Writ Petition, quashed the SVLDRS-2 and SVLDRS-3 Forms, and directed the issuance of an appropriate Discharge Certificate considering the undisputed duty deposit and the disputed liability claim. The Court instructed the first respondent to expedite the issuance of the Discharge Certificate in accordance with the petitioner's entitlement under the SVLDR Scheme.
TaxTMI 