The HC held that reversal of input tax credit during an ongoing inspection, in the presence of officers, supported the finding that the declaration under Section 74(5) was not voluntary; the subsequent payment of interest and penalty and request for closure were treated as consequential. It noted that a bare allegation of coercion needs supporting circumstances, but on these facts the inspection context made the involuntariness credible, so that finding was sustained. As the closure under Sections 74(5) and 74(6) was invalid, the proceedings were restored to the pre-closure stage, with liberty to proceed under Sections 73 or 74 and exclusion of the intervening period from limitation.
The HC held that reversal of input tax credit during an ongoing inspection, in the presence of officers, supported the finding that the declaration under Section 74(5) was not voluntary; the subsequent payment of interest and penalty and request for closure were treated as consequential. It noted that a bare allegation of coercion needs supporting circumstances, but on these facts the inspection context made the involuntariness credible, so that finding was sustained. As the closure under Sections 74(5) and 74(6) was invalid, the proceedings were restored to the pre-closure stage, with liberty to proceed under Sections 73 or 74 and exclusion of the intervening period from limitation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
