https://www.taxtmi.com/css/info/rss_sitemap/rss_feed.css?v=1746094055 https://www.taxtmi.com Business/Tax/Law/GST/India/Taxation/Policies/Legal/Corporate Tax/Personal Tax/Vat Law/Legal Information/Tax Information/Legal Services/Tax Services Tax Management India. Com / MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved. One stop solution for Direct Taxes and Indirect Taxes https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762953 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762953 Seeking quashing of the impugned Endorsement passed by the 3rd respondent - seeking direction to the respondents to accept payment paid by the petitioner towards Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, Rules, 2019 - petition is opposed by the respondents who contend that since the petitioner did not deposit / pay the amount indicated in SVLDRS-3 on or before the last date i.e., 30.06.2020, the respondents were fully justified in issuing the impugned Endorsement, thereby denying the benefit of SVLDRS in favour of the petitioner and consequently, the impugned Endorsement does not warrant interference in the present petition. HELD THAT:- The undisputed material on record will indicate that pursuant to the application in Form SVLDRS-1 submitted by the petitioner, the respondents issued Form SVLDRS-3, pursuant to which, the petitioner was entitled to make payment up to 30.06.2020. In this context, it is relevant to state that on account of the prevailing covid-19 pandemic, the Apex court extended the period of limitation in [ 2020 (5) TMI 418 - SC ORDER ]. So also, under identical circumstances, the Madras High Court and the Bombay High Court have held that though the Notification dated 14.05.2020 extended the time limit for payment under the SVLDRS up to 30.06.2020, having regard to the prevailing covid-19 pandemic, the petitioners-assessees therein would be entitled to extension of time in Apnaa Projects s case [ 2022 (9) TMI 1003 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ], N. Sudararajan s case [ 2023 (11) TMI 899 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ] and Cradle Runways s case [ 2024 (8) TMI 155 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ]. A perusal of the impugned Endorsement at Annexure-D dated 13.01.2022 will indicate that the sole ground on which the payment made by the petitioner on 30.09.2020 was rejected by the respondents is by stating that the same was beyond the maximum time limit of 30.06.2020 as per the Notification dated 14.05.2020. However, in the light of the judgments of the Apex Court with regard to extension of limitation and the judgments of the Madras High Court and Bombay High Court granting the benefit of the SVLDRS in favour of the petitioner / assessees therein on the ground of the prevailing covid-19 pandemic even in cases where payments were made subsequent to 30.06.2020, it is opined that the impugned Endorsement issued by the 3rd respondent deserves to be quashed and necessary directions are to be issued to the concerned respondents to accept the payment made by the petitioner and issue a discharge certificate in Form SVLDRS-4 within a stipulated timeframe. Insofar as the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents are concerned, the effect of the covid-19 pandemic and the orders of the Apex court extending period of limitation have not been considered in the said judgments and consequently, no reliance can be placed upon the said judgments by the respondents in support of their defence. The impugned Endorsement at Annexure D dated 13.01.2022 issued by respondent No. 3 is hereby quashed - Respondent No. 3 is directed to accept payments vide Annexures B and B1 made by the petitioner on 30.09.2020 towards SVLDRS Scheme and proceed to take necessary steps to issue the Discharge Certificate in Form SVLDRS-4 in favour of the petitioner in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - petition allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 20 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530