By TIOL News Service:

ERNAKULAM, JULY 13, 2016: PETITIONER had approached the High Court challenging order by which request made by the petitioner for extending the period of the Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme, 2013 to enable the petitioner to pay the amount as per Scheme has been rejected.

The petitioner applied under the Scheme by making a declaration. However, the petitioner could not remit the amount as specified under the Scheme within the stipulated time. Petitioner therefore requested for extending the period of the Scheme. The same came to be rejected by the department.

Respondents contended that the Scheme had worked out itself and if no payment is made in terms of the Scheme, petitioner will be liable for other consequences. Petitioner submitted that though the Scheme could not be extended, still, in the absence of any quantification of the interest and penalty, no recovery steps could be taken against the petitioner.

After hearing both sides, the High Court held:

+ Having regard to the factual situation, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief. The Scheme is statutory in nature and unless the provisions in the statute are complied within the time specified, it shall always be open for the respondent authorities to take necessary steps to collect the interest as well as penalty in accordance with law. Therefore, the challenge to the impugned order is not justified.

+ As far as the prohibitory order is concerned, even if quantification of the interest and penalty, if any, is pending, nothing prevents the department from initiating appropriate action by way of garnishee proceedings and the same also cannot be challenged.

+ Under the above factual issues, the only direction that can be given is to direct the respondent authorities to quantify the amount payable by the petitioner and make a demand in that regard within a specified time.

+ The respondent authority shall quantify the amount due from the petitioner and make a demand within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

(See 2016-TIOL-1358-HC-KERALA-ST)