TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 464
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Lordships may be pleased to admit this petition; B. Your Lordships may be pleased to allow this petition; C. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ quashing and setting aside letter dated 11/3/2022 (VERA-DISPOSAL LETTER NO. 77722VSDISP018160995) being issued by Respondent no. 01 herein, whereby application of the petitioner bearing no. 99KS0035845 under Vera Samadhan Yojna 2019 was disposed; D. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the Respondent No, 01 to immediately restore Application No. 99KS0035845 (date of acknowledgement - 25/01/2020) being filed by the petitioner under Vera Samadhan Yojana, 2019 and directing the Respondent No. 01 to issue Remission Order / Certificate in regard to the said application No. 99KS0035845 under the said Yojana to the effect that the petitioner herein would not be required to deposit / pay any amount towards tax / interest / penalty in accordance with said Yojana as the entire amount of tax along with interest is already paid by the petitioner; E. Pending issuance of notice, admission and final hearing of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessees whose appeals were pending before the appellate authority were eligible to avail benefits under the said Yojana. As per the said Yojana, if the applicant pay the principal amount of tax, the applicant would get a waiver of interest and penalty. The procedure for availing the benefit was also incorporated in the said Yojana. There was a condition that applicant under the Yojana must withdraw the appeal if he wants to avail the benefit. 6.6 The petitioner had applied for benefits under the said Yojana. The petitioner was provided with an acknowledgement receipt dtd. 25/01/2020 by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax / Commercial Tax Officer, Ghatak - 14 (ABD). It may be observed that application is filed in regard to five different appeals which pertains to period from 01/04/2012 - 31/03/2013 to 01/04/2016 - 31/03/2017 respectively. Details of the respective Assessment Orders confirming demand against the petitioner are mentioned. Details of all the appeals filed are mentioned. It is also mentioned whether appeal would be withdrawn fully or partially. It is mentioned in the said column against all the applications that appeal would be withdrawn fully. 6.7 Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itled as "Disposal of application under Vera Samadhan Yojana - 2019'. It was mentioned therein that as the petitioner had failed to make full payment as mentioned in the intimation letter, the application for availing benefit under the said Yojana stands disposed. Said letter was issued, despite the fact that as per the intimation letter, the amount payable by the petitioner under the Yojana was Rs. '0'. 6.13 On 14/07/2022, without any rhyme and reason, the Respondent No. 01 had attached the bank account of the petitioner. No intimation regarding the said bank attachment was provided to the petitioner. The petitioner had issued payment cheques to their suppliers in a normal course of business. Those cheques were dishonoured by the bank. Upon inquiring with the bank, it was learnt that the respondents herein have asked the bank to freeze the bank account of the petitioner. It was also learnt that not only the bank account of petitioner firm was freezed but the personal saving account of the proprietor of the petitioner firm was also freezed. No bank attachment notices were served upon the petitioner, Upon Inquiry, the petitioner was informed that since they had not paid the requi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er submitted that the petitioner was not granted any opportunity of hearing before rejection of application under the Amnesty Scheme. 7.2 It was submitted that the amount sought to be demanded in the intimation letter issued by the respondent-Authority is based upon erroneous understanding that the assessment order in respect of which, the amnesty was sought was only with respect to penalty. 7.3 It was submitted that the assessment order was relating to tax, interest as well as penalty and not only with respect to penalty and as the petitioner had already paid the tax and interest, the demand was raised qua levy of penalty only and therefore, it cannot be said that the assessment order was not for tax, interest and penalty. 7.4 It was therefore, submitted that the petitioner was not required to pay 20% amount of the outstanding dues as per Clause 4.5 of the Amnesty Scheme. 7.5 Learned advocate Mr. Trivedi, in the alternative, submitted that the Tribunal ought not to have refused to restore the appeals in view of the fact that the application of the Amnesty Scheme was rejected by the respondent-authority. It was therefore submitted that if it is held that the petitioner ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x and interest prior to passing of the assessment order, no further amount is required to be paid by the petitioner is not acceptable because ultimately, the demand raised in the assessment order pertains only to penalty as the petitioner has already paid the tax and interest. 8.2 It was submitted that time limit prescribed under Clause 8 of the Amnesty Scheme provides that the first installment i.e. 10% of the amount payable shall be paid before 15th March, 2020 and the remainder shall be paid in 11 installments which was increased from time and again and the last date of payment in order to claim the benefit under the Scheme was 31.08.2021. It was submitted that however, the petitioner did not pay the amount as per the intimation letter issued under the Amnesty Scheme and therefore, by the impugned letter dated 11.03.2022 the petitioner was intimated that the benefit under the Amnesty Scheme cannot be granted as the petitioner did not make full payment against the outstanding amount intimated by the department. 8.3 It was therefore submitted that on perusal of the intimation letter placed on record by the petitioner, the petitioner was called upon to make payment as per the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Scheme prescribed the time limit for payment of first installment i.e. 10% of the amount payable on or before 15.03.2020 and the remainder to be paid in 11 installments. Said time limit was extended from time to time and lastly, it was extended upto 31.08.2021. 11. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner has paid the tax and interest prior to the framing of the assessment and therefore, assessment order under which, the tax and interest and penalty was imposed and ultimately, after giving set off of the payment of tax and interest, the demand was raised qua penalty only. 12. It is also a matter of fact that the petitioner challenged the assessment order wherein tax, interest and penalty is imposed before the First Appellate Authority. Thus, the petitioner was aggrieved by imposition of tax, interest, and penalty and not only penalty. 13. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner has accepted the assessment order qua tax and interest and only was aggrieved by imposition of penalty. 14. The benefit of the Amnesty Scheme is available for waiver of interest and penalty. However, the Scheme also provides that no refund would be issued qua interest or penalty ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 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 recoveries under the above enactments are to be covered. 21. Thus, the object of the amnesty scheme is to bring about expeditious and effective resolution of old disputes and recoveries of old outstanding dues of the Government and reduction of administrative costs. Since such scheme is applicable to all pending cases, the officers acting under the relevant statutes are expected to respect the object of the scheme and to ensure that the assessees get the benefit under the scheme. Therefore, when a bona fide request is made by an assessee to adjourn the hearing of a case with a view to enable him to avail the benefit of the scheme, the concerned officer is duty bound to respect such request. Therefore, when in the present case, where the matter had not been taken up for hearing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed to refund of the amount so paid. On a conjoint reading of paragraph 10 and paragraph 13 of the Scheme, it is evident that the intention is to grant benefit also to those dealers who have paid the tax and interest prior to coming into operation of the Scheme. The only condition is that in case where the tax, interest and penalty has already been paid, the dealer shall not be entitled to refund thereof. The provisions of paragraph 7 of the Scheme have to be construed in consonance with the provisions of paragraph 10 and 13 thereof, which clearly indicate that all those dealers who have paid the taxes during the period of operation of the Scheme and prior thereto are brought within the ambit thereof. 12. Under the circumstances, the second ground raised by the respondents for denying the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme to the petitioners is also not in consonance with the provisions of the Scheme. The respondents are, therefore, not justified in denying the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme to the petitioners. The above view is fortified by the view taken by the Karnataka High Court in the above referred decisions. 13. Examining the case from another angle, if the inter....