By TIOL News Service

CHENNAI, DEC 05, 2014: IT seems there is widespread opinion in the field that VCES Scheme 2013 is a drain on exchequer and they have to protect the revenue by somehow rejecting the VCES applications and confirm the demands with interest and penalties.

In this case, the assessee filed VCES declaration after receiving an intimation dated 07.03.2013 from the Range Superintendent about their liability. The declaration was rejected on the ground that the issue was detected in audit of another assessee (third party) which was initiated much before the cutoff date, i.e., 01.03.2013 and Show Cause Notice was issued to the assessee on 31.07.2013, based on the audit report and hence they are not eligible for VCES. The assessee filed an appeal with the Commissioner (Appeals), but the same was dismissed as not maintainable. Even the request by the assessee to keep the adjudication of Show Cause Notice in abeyance was not considered and the demand was confirmed. The appeal against this order is pending before the Commissioner (Appeals). The assessee filed a Writ Petition in High Court seeking directions to quash the rejection of VCES application.

The High Court held:

This Court has no hesitation to hold that as on the date when the application was filed by the petitioner, there was no audit as against the petitioner. Even assuming that there was an audit with M/s.Shobika Impex Private Limited, (third party) such audit was not put on notice to the petitioner, by the competent authority, till the show cause notice was issued. The communication of the Range Officer was not an intimation of audit objection. Even assuming if it is considered as an intimation of audit objection, yet the communication on 07.03.2013 was much after the cutoff date.

In the light of the above, the impugned order, dated 14.03.2014, calls for interference. Accordingly, Writ Petition No.29929 of 2014 is partly allowed and the impugned order, dated 14.03.2014, is quashed and the matter is remanded to the second respondent for fresh consideration.

(See 2014-TIOL-2132-HC-MAD-ST)