2022 (8) TMI 834

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rm engaged in Works Contract Service is aggrieved by Annexure P/9 by which the claim of the petitioner seeking benefit of waiver of the interest amount of Rs.4,77,847/- imposed for late deposit of tax dues, preferred under the SVLDRS [Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019] (for brevity "the Scheme of 2019") has been rejected on the ground of ineligibility. 2. The sole question raised by learned counsel for the petitioner in the given facts and circumstances is as to whether the component of interest would be covered by the expression "amount of duty"/"amount in arrears" under the said Scheme of 2019 to extend the amnesty available under the scheme to the petitioner or not? 3. Without entering into the prolixity of factual....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... defined in clause (d) of Section 121 which means the amount of central excise duty, the service tax and the cess payable under the direct tax enactment. The petitioner has deposited the amount of duty alongwith his regular returns under the service tax law but it was filed belatedly. Thus no amount of duty was payable under the service tax law, therefore, the provisions of clause (d) of Section 123 has no application on the facts of the present case. 13. The admitted facts of the present case are that the petitioner has filed return under the service tax law prior to 30th June, 2019 and deposited the amount of duty alongwith the returns which was filed belatedly. Therefore, clause (e) of Section 123 read with clause (c) of Section 121 of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssessee therein being eligible under the scheme was entitled to an opportunity of being heard before the designated Committee under Clause 127 of the Scheme or not? Thus, the said decision of the Bombay High Court is of no avail to the petitioner. 4. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon the decisions of High Court of Chhattisgarh dated 22.06.2021 in WPT No.89/2021, the decision of the Division Bench of Ahmedabad High Court dated 27.02.2020 in R/Special Application No.21744/2019 where the component of interest is held to be a part of expression "amount in arrears" and "amount of duty" under the Scheme of 2019. 5. In view of the above conflicting views, it would be appropriate that the Competent Authority i.e. th....