TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (11) TMI 665
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Ms. S Das, Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents in the Ministry of Finance, Government of India and the authorities under the GST. 2. The petitioner in course of their transaction were imposed a penalty of Rs. 15,000/- as per the order dated 31-3-2016 of the Commissioner, Central Excise and Service Tax, Shillong. The petitioners in order to avail the benefits under a scheme called....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....being not correctly stated in the SVLDRS-1 form, it has been decided by this Court in its judgment dated 4-5-2020 in WP(C) No. 2149/2020 [2020 (38) G.S.T.L. 579 (Gau)]. The relevant portion of the said judgment is extracted as below : "6. In the circumstance, the only issue before the Court would be whether the claim of the petitioner for the benefit under Scheme 2019 would stand rejected a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nstrued to be an act of misleading the authorities to claim a benefit which otherwise a party is not entitled or the mistake made was more of inadvertent nature, which can also be terms as a callous mistake, which does not put the party making such mistake on an undue advantageous position so as to make them entitled to a benefit which they are otherwise not. A mistake that was deliberately made t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by not stating about the penalty imposed upon them in Form SVLDRS-1 cannot be said to be a mistake by which the petitioner claimed an undue benefit which they otherwise are not entitled under the law. When we look into the Scheme 2019, we do not find any provision which provides that a person upon whom a penalty is imposed would not be entitled to the benefit given under the scheme. In fact on th....