TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (6) TMI 631
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eby, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs; "20. ... A. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order quashing and setting aside impugned communication dated 6.10.2022 (annexed at Annexure A) and the Respondents may please be directed to forthwith grant benefit of amnesty scheme to the Petitioner; B. Pending notice, admission and final hearing of this petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to restrain the Respondents from taking coercive recovery in respect of dues for the year 2006-07; C. Ex parte ad interim relief in terms of Prayer B may kindly be granted; D. ..." 3. Heard, learned Ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the said scheme, once the principal amount of tax was fully paid, the amount towards interest and penalty was to be waived off. 4.2.2 Accordingly, the petitioner made an application for getting the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme within the stipulated time and while so doing, the petitioner also withdrew the appeals filed by it before the concerned appellate authority. 4.2.3 At this stage, learned Advocate, Mr. Sheth, referred to the document / intimation, a copy of which is produced at Page-34 of the compilation. 4.2.4 Learned Advocate, Mr. Sheth, submitted that, as per the application submitted by the petitioner, it was required to pay total tax of Rs. 5,37,686/- towards VAT, whereas, towards CST tax, it was required to pay Rs.54,1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e petitioner made the payment, as per the calculation given / verified by the officer of the Respondents under the Amnesty Scheme, which is not in dispute. Now, by way of affidavit of Respondent No. 2, it is being contended before this Court that the notice of demand was issued in the year 2011, wherein, the total amount of tax payable by the petitioner was shown to be Rs. 5,39,787/-, whereas, the petitioner, in the application under Amnesty Scheme, mentioned the amount of Rs. 5,37,686/-, i.e. the petitioner mentioned Rs. 2000/- less, and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to get the benefit of Amnesty Scheme, which is unjust and improper. 5.1 Learned Advocate, Mr. Sheth, pointed out that, as per Clause 7(3) of the Amnesty Scheme,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Amnesty Scheme. It was, therefore, prayed that this petition be dismissed. 7. Having heard the learned Advocates for the parties and having perused the material on record, it would emerge that the concerned authority issued the demand notice in the year 2011, whereby, the petitioner was required to pay Rs. 5,39,787/- towards the tax. 7.1. It appears that, later on, the State Government introduced the Amnesty Scheme in the year 2019 and as per Clause-4.1 (1) of the said Scheme, the concerned assessee was required to pay the full principal amount of tax, whereupon, the liability of such an assessee to pay interest and penalty was to be waived off. 7.2 It appears that the petitioner made an application under the Amnesty Scheme. H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere were approximately more than 20,000 cases pending at different levels under the Sales Tax Act, Value Added Tax Act, Central Sales Tax Act, Motor Spirit Taxation Act, Entry Tax Act and Sugar Cane Purchase Tax Act. As a result considerable recoveries of the amounts involved in such cases were outstanding. Various business associations in the State had made representations for expeditious and effective disposal of such old cases. By this scheme the Government will get the amounts of old pending recoveries, the business segment will get a huge relief and the administrative cost of the Government will be reduced. Considering this submission a proposal had been made for introducing the Amnesty Scheme. Under this scheme, the outstanding recove....