AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (1) TMI 1140
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant is a service tax registrant under erstwhile service tax law. The appellant filed a refund claim on 30.06.2020 for Rs.6,59,022/- on the ground that while applying for Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (herein after referred as SVLDRS) under 'Voluntary Disclosure' category, they had deposited excess amount which has become refundable after settlement of tax liability. A declaration dated 31.12.2019 was filed under the said category by disclosing the tax liability of Rs.32,03,701/- for the period of April, 2014 to March, 2017. Pursuant thereto, the SVLDRS-4 dated 02.03.2020 towards full and final settlement of the tax dues under SVLDRS was issued in favour of the appellant. The aforesaid amount of Rs.6,59,022/- was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....larant in terms of Section 124 (No.2) of 2019 (SVLDRS Act). Despite being objected, the Designated Authority still calculated an amount of Rs.32,03,701/- towards the payable amount by the appellant which stands fully paid. Otherwise also, under the scheme the payment had to be a onetime payment. It is submitted that because of the said reasons amount of Rs.6,59,022/- is in excess of the payable liability of the declarant as estimated by the department. The department had no authority to retain the excess payment and was liable to refund the same. Resultantly, the order of rejection of refund is not sustainable. 3.1 Learned Counsel further submitted that the provisions invoked by the adjudicating authority to deny the refund are not appli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....val contentions and perusing the records. 6. I observe that the grievance of appellant is that the tax dues which were already paid by the appellant have not been adjusted by the designated authority. To appreciate the said grievance, it is foremost necessary to peruse the objective and the procedure under SVLDRS Scheme. I observe that the objective of scheme is two fold: (1) It was introduced as a onetime measure for liquidation of past disputes of central excise and service tax. (2) To provide an opportunity of voluntary disclosure to noncompliant tax payers. 7. The benefits as available under the scheme are observed as follows: (i) It provides total waiver of interest and penalty. (ii) Provides f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... stated in the declaration. From Section 124(e), it is observed that where the tax dues are payable on account of voluntary disclosure by the declarant then no relief shall be available with respect to the tax dues. 10. It is an undisputed fact of the present case that the appellant herein has been a voluntary declarant. I observe that under the scheme when the tax payer files declaration, the same has to be filed in Form No. 1 i.e. SVLDRS-1, wherein lies an option about the categories as provided under the scheme i.e. either arrears or litigation or investigation/audit or voluntary disclosure. While filing that form, online, the applicant has to select the appropriate category along with the amount payable by him. After the said declara....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has been the main contention of appellant's argument, same stands totally unproved. Otherwise also, it being a case of voluntary disclosure, the appellant had to self assesse the payable amount in SVLDRS-1. The self declaration form has also not been produced by the appellant. Reflection of disagreement in SVLDRS-1 itself has no meaning in absence of SVLDRS-2/2B. Otherwise also department's stand is that said disagreement was examined in terms of Section 125 of the Act of 2019 read with Circular No. 1071/4/2019-CX.8 dated 27.08.2019 and thereafter the tax liability was estimated at Rs.32,03,701/-. In the circumstances, the contention of the appellant is not at all acceptable. 13. Coming to the ground that the refund has been rejected in....