SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

PM-STIAC discusses accelerating Industry-Academia Partnership for Research and InnovationIndia, Singapore hold dialogue over cyber policy44 bids received under 10th Round of Commercial Coal Mine AuctionsCops arrest former Dy PM of Nepal in cooperative fraud casePuri highlights India's Petrochemical potential at India Chem 2024UN reports record high cocaine production in ColombiaMinister unveils 'Aviation Park' showcasing India's Aviation HeritageED finds PFI wanted to start Islamic movement in IndiaBlocking Credit - Rule 86ASEBI says investors can use 3-in-1 accounts to apply online for securitiesI-T- Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) need not be imposed when assessee moved an adjournment application & later complied with notice u/s 142(1): ITAT4 Kanwariyas killed as vehicle runs over them in Banka, BiharI-T- Accounting principles do not prescribe maintaining of a day-to-day stock register, and the books of accounts cannot be rejected on this basis alone: ITATUN food looted and diverted to army in EthiopiaCus - Alleged breach of conditions for operating public bonded warehouse; CESTAT rightly rejected allegations, having found no evidence of any such breach: HCUS budget deficit surges beyond USD 1.8 trillionST - Onus for proving admissibility of Cenvat Credit rests with service provider under Rule 9(6) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004: CESTATIf China goes into Taiwan, Trump promises to impose additional tariffsRussians love Indian films; Putin lauds BollywoodCus - Classification of goods is to be determined in accordance with Customs Tariff Act & General Interpretative Rules; Country-of-Origin Certificate may offer some guidance, but cannot solely dictate classification: CESTATCus - Benefit of such Country-of-Origin certificates cannot be denied if all relevant conditions are met under the applicable Customs Tariff rules: CESTATCuban power grid collapses; Country plunges into darknessCus - As per trite law, merely claiming a classification or exemption does not constitute mis-declaration or suppression - any misclassification does not equate to willful intent to evade duty: CESTATKarnataka mulling over 2% fee on aggregator platforms to bankroll gig worker welfare fundCus - Extended limitation cannot be invoked in case of assessee who is a regular importer with a consistent classification approach: CESTAT
 
Extending time to comply with payment under VCES Scheme - Petition against refusal by Department to extend time has no merit: High Court

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)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Shri Samrat Choudhary, Hon’ble Deputy CM & FM of State of Bihar, delivering inaugural speech at TIOL Tax Congress 2024.

TOP NEWS


AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



Justice A K Patnaik, Mentor to Hon'ble Jury for TIOL Awards 2024, addressing the gathering at the event.

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST