Court Quashes Communication & Bank Attachment, Directs Benefits Under Amnesty Scheme

The court allowed the petition, quashing the communication and bank attachment order. The respondent was directed to grant the petitioner benefits under the amnesty scheme, acknowledging the pre-paid tax amount and providing remission of penalty and interest.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Entitlement to remission of interest and penalty under the CST Act.
2. Eligibility for benefit under the Vera Samadhan Yojana amnesty scheme.
3. Legality of the bank attachment order.
4. Restoration of the first appeal and stay order.

Summary:

1. Entitlement to Remission of Interest and Penalty:
The petitioner, engaged in the manufacture and sale of Ceramic Tiles, challenged the assessment order for the year 2012-13, which demanded tax with interest and penalty without crediting the tax amount already paid by the petitioner. The petitioner had paid Rs. 48,75,000/- but the assessing officer did not consider this payment in the assessment order.

2. Eligibility for Benefit under the Vera Samadhan Yojana Amnesty Scheme:
The petitioner applied under the Vera Samadhan Yojana - 2019 amnesty scheme, pointing out that the tax liability was already paid. However, the application was rejected by the respondent, who did not consider the pre-paid tax amount. The court noted that the petitioner was eligible for the scheme as the tax was paid before the assessment order and the scheme's announcement. The court referred to the precedent set in Safal Developers, where it was held that pre-paid taxes should be considered for amnesty benefits.

3. Legality of the Bank Attachment Order:
The petitioner's bank account was attached by the respondent for recovery of alleged outstanding dues, again without considering the pre-paid tax amount. The court found this action to be erroneous since the petitioner had already paid the tax amount, making the attachment order illegal.

4. Restoration of the First Appeal and Stay Order:
The petitioner had filed a first appeal against the assessment order, and the appellate authority had granted a stay considering the pre-paid tax amount. The court observed that the petitioner had withdrawn the appeal to apply under the amnesty scheme, which was wrongly rejected by the respondent.

Judgment:
The court allowed the petition, quashing the impugned communication dated 11.05.2022 and the bank attachment order dated 20.06.2022. The respondent was directed to grant the benefit of the amnesty scheme to the petitioner, acknowledging the pre-paid tax amount and providing remission of penalty and interest. The rule was made absolute.

---