TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 757
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2019 (for short 'SLVDRS') was not accepted. The petitioner was served with notice of recovery of Rs. 30,34,955/-. 5. The petitioner is engaged in business of production and clearance of finished goods viz. Organic Chemicals falling under Chapter 29 of the First Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. 6. A show-cause notice dated 28.03.2018 was issued upon the petitioner to recover service tax on payment made to the Foreign Government Agencies for statutory fees/charges for the licenses and permissions. After considering the detailed reply, the Order-in-Original dated 27.03.2019 was passed imposing penalty of Rs. 3,03,495/- with service tax amounting to Rs. 30,34,955/- and interest thereon. 7. Being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) after deposit of Rs. 2,27,622/- as mandatory pre-deposit to file appeal as per the provision of section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. 8. The First Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal by order dated 30.08.1999 and confirmed the Order-in-Original. 9. Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme, 201....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent No. 4 directing the petitioner to pay dues confirmed under Order-in- original or to make payment of Rs. 11,22,933/- as per Form SVLDRS-3. 16. However, it is the case of the petitioner that thereafter also, the petitioner approached respondent No. 3 and filed various reminders to rectify Form SVLDRS-3 as error is committed by respondent No. 3 by reducing the amount of pre-deposit from the total demand instead of reducing the amount of pre-deposit from 60% of the amount payable by the petitioner. 17. The petitioner thereafter received impugned letter dated 14.08.2020 rejecting the claim of the petitioner and the petitioner was informed that the time to make the payment under SVLDRS has already been expired. 18. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred this petition with following prayers: "A. Your Lordships be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, quashing and setting aside the order of the Designated Authority (Respondent No. 3) in the Form of SVLDRS-3 and letter dated 14.08.2020 (Annexure A collectively) made under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 thereby directing the respondents, their servants....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted by the authority and he has been unnecessarily placed under heavy financial burden of Rs. 30 Lakh, whereas earlier, only Rs. 11 Lakh had been claimed by the Department. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as the scheme only provided with recovery pursuant to the nonacceptance of the declaration made by the petitioners under the Scheme of 2019, the petitioners may not be further proceeded with provided they deposit Rs. 11,22,934/- within two weeks from today without prejudice to his rights to claim any refund of any amount which is found to be paid in excess on the final determination. 6. It goes without saying that in case the above amount is not deposited within the time stipulated, the respondents authorities would be free to proceed with the recovery. 7. Mr. Shah submits that the Department would need to unlock the portal to enable the petitioners to deposit the amount online under the scheme, for which, the petitioners would make an appropriate application within next three days. Once the written request is made, the Department would provide the access so that the amount may be deposited within the time allowed." 20. Learned advocate Mr. Dhaval Sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was pre-deposited by the petitioner is available for being set off in terms of Section 124 (2) of Sabka Vishwas - (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. Section 124 (2) of the said Act which reads as under: 124 (2): The relief calculated under sub-section (1) shall be subject to the condition that any amount paid as pre-deposit at any stage of appellate proceedings under the indirect tax enactment or as deposit during enquiry, investigation or audit, shall be deducted when issuing the statement indicating the amount payable by the petitioner. Provided that if the amount of pre-deposit or deposit already paid by the declarant proceeds the amount payable by the declarant, as indicated in the statement issued by the designated committee, the declarant shall not be entitled to any refund. 19. The petitioner is entitled to deduct Rs. 15,35,735/being the amount pre-deposited by the petitioner during the course of investigation in terms of Section 124 (2) of Sabka Vishwas - (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 from the aforesaid sum of Rs. 18,99,158.40 Thus, required to pay the petitioner only a sum is of Rs. 3,63,419/(Rs. 18,99,154.40 - Rs. 15,35,735/-) and not Rs. 12,75,256....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ount of- (i) no appeal having been filed by the declarant against an order or an order in appeal before expiry of the period of time for filing appeal; or (ii) an order in appeal relating to the declarant attaining finality; or (iii) the declarant having filed a return under the indirect tax enactment on or before the 30th day of June, 2019, wherein he has admitted a tax liability but not paid it." 27. Section 121(d) defined 'amount of duty' referred to in clause (c) of section 121 as under: "(d) "amount of duty" means the amount of central excise duty, the service tax and the cess payable under the indirect tax enactment." 28. From the above provisions and the definitions, the benefit of deduction in tax dues where the amount of duty is less than Rs. 50 lakhs, the amount in arrears is to be computed as per 60% of the amount of duty comprising of amount of central excise duty, service tax and cess payable under the indirect tax enactment. Therefore, the amount of pre-deposit made by the petitioner, at the time of filing of appeal, cannot be said to be an amount paid towards the amount in arrears as such amount is only a deposit. The Legislature has therefore, stipulated i....