News Update

Cus - Export of non-basmati rice - Notification 20/2023 insofar as it denies the benefit of the transitional arrangement as contained in para-1.05 of the FTP 2023, is bad in law: HCCus - Refund of SAD - 102/2007-Cus - Areca Nut and Supari are one and the same - Objections with regard to name, nature and status of importer or buyers or the end use of goods purchased by them etc. are extraneous: HCCX - Interest on Refund - Since wrong order annexed by petitioner in paper book, Bench is unable to proceed further - Petition is dismissed with liberty to file a fresh one: HCGST - No E-way bill - When petitioner imports machinery and after Customs clearance, transports same to his own factory, it cannot be said that such a transportation would fall within the definition of term 'supply' - Penalty imposable under second limb of s.129(1)(a): HCGST - Fix responsibility on officers who allowed BG to lapse - Petitioner not justified in not renewing BG - Cost of Rs.15 lacs imposed, to be paid to PM Cares Fund: HCGST - Since the parties agree that petition can be disposed of on the basis of records available before Appellate Authority, petitioner is directed to enclose all documents filed before Appellate Authority in a compilation, in form of a paper book: HCWrong RoadST - Whether any service is used for personal consumption or not is certainly question of fact and being question of fact, no substantial question of law arises: HCGovt proposes to amend Geographical Indication of Goods Rules; Draft issued for feedbackST - If what has been paid as tax is without authority of law, Revenue should refund the same - Denial of credit would result in the whole exercise being tax neutral: HCWarehousing Authority notifies several agri goods to be stored in only registered warehousesST - Even if the petitioner may have a case on merits, it is best left to be decided by the Appellate Authority under the hierarchy prescribed under the FA, 1994: HCUS FDA okays Eli Lilly Alzheimer’s drugGST - Petitioner challenges jurisdiction of assessing officer - Petitioner is entitled to file an appeal u/s 107 by availing an alternate efficacious remedy: HCFive from Telangana killed in car accident on Pune-Solapur HighwayGST - Existence of an alternative remedy is a material consideration but not a bar to the exercise of jurisdiction: HCHush money case against Donald Trump - Sentencing deferred to Sept 18GST - It is open to a trader to take goods by whichever route he opts, unless the law otherwise requires, destination point being intact: HCDeadly hurricane Beryl smashes properties in JamaicaGST - Conclusion that taxable person is providing a service to supplier while taking the benefit of a discount by facilitating an increase in the volume of sales of such supplier is ex facie erroneous and contrary to the fundamental tenets of GST law: HCIsrael claims 900 militants killed in Rafah since May monthGST - Order expressly records that personal hearing notice was returned with endorsement 'no such person at address' - Since petitioner has shifted to a new premises, it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to contest demand: HC116 die in stampede at UP ’Satsang’I-T- Application for revision of order dismissed in limine on grounds of delay; case remanded for re-consideration: HCWe are deepening economic ties with India, says US officialI-T- As per Section 119(2)(b), power to condone applications relate to claims for amount exceeding Rs 50 lakhs are to be considered by CBDT; however it is impermissible for CBDT to pass order on merits: HC8 Dutch engineers build world’s longest bicycle - 180 feet, 11 inchesI-T- Additions framed u/s 68 for unexplained income & u/s 69 for unexplained expenditure not tenable where complete transactional details are furnished & not doubted: HCRailways earns Rs 14798 Crore from Freight loading in June monthI-T- Delay in filing ITR is per se insufficient reason to estimate assessee's profit @15% on turnover, more so where audited financial report is filed in timely manner: ITATMoD inks MoU to set up testing facilities in Unmanned Aerial System in TN Defence Industrial CorridorI-T- For invoking section 69A, assessee should be found to be owner of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article & which is not recorded in the books of account: ITATGovt proposes Guidelines for ethical approach to Coal MiningI-T- TDS credit can be allowed based on AIS, where details pertaining to TDS, advance tax & other payments are reflected in Form 26AS: ITATVaishnaw to inaugurate Global IndiaAI Summit 2024I-T- Lending money with the primary intention of earning interest can be considered a business activity, but nature and manner of lending, as well as the frequency, should be taken into account: ITAT
 
SVLDRS, 2019 - Why pick on me?

 

NOVEMBER 05, 2019

By S T Vishesh

THE CBIC in its third Circular on the subjecct matter, numbered 1073/06/2019-CX, Dated: October 29, 2019 on the SVLDRS, 2019 has clarified (reproduced below)-

2(vi) Representations have also been received that the cases where appeals were filed after 30.06.2019 should also be allowed relief under the Scheme. It is stated that such cases are not covered per se. However, if a taxpayer withdraws the appeal and furnishes the undertaking to the department in terms of Para 2(viii) of Circular No.  1072/05/2019-CX  dated 25.09.2019, they can file a declaration under the Scheme.

Emphasis supplied

Take a look at the September 2019 Circular, paragraph 2(viii) -

(viii) Section 121(c) (i) and (ii) define "an amount in arrears" as the amount of duty which is recoverable, inter alia, on account of no appeal having been filed by the declarant against an order or order in appeal before the expiry of the period of time for filing of appeal or the order in appeal having attained finality. There may be situations where the taxpayer does not want to file an appeal even though the time period for filing of appeal is not over. It is clarified that in such cases, the taxpayer can file a declaration under the Scheme provided he gives in writing to the department that he will not file an appeal. This declaration shall be binding on the taxpayer.

Incidentally, the Board does not want you to tell the minuses of this round about manner of becoming eligible for the SVLDRS.

And that is, in terms of s. 124(1)(c), the relief which such a declarant is entitled is -

(c) where the tax dues are relatable to an amount in arrears and,-

(i) the amount of duty is, rupees fifty lakhs or less, then, sixty per cent. of the tax dues;

(ii) the amount of duty is more than rupees fifty lakhs, then, forty per cent. of the tax dues;

Had the appeal been filed before 30.06.2019, the relief would have been in terms of s.124(1)(a) of the FA, 2019 and which is -

(a) where the tax dues are relatable to a show cause notice or one or more appeals arising out of such notice which is pending as on the 30th day of June, 2019, and if the amount of duty is,-

(i) rupees fifty lakhs or less, then, seventy per cent. of the tax dues;

(ii) more than rupees fifty lakhs, then, fifty per cent. of the tax dues;

Little mercies upon the hapless assessee by the CBIC.

But then, what if the Order was passed prior to 30.06.2019 and the aggrieved assessee had, as per law, time to file appeal within the period mandated as per section 35 or for that matter section 35B of the CEA, 1944.

Merely because he filed appeal after 30.06.2019, why should he be at a disadvantage by not allowing to claim the relief as per clause (a) and be relegated to clause (b) (supra). Moreso, since what is intended to be achieved is to take the clock back and that can very well be construed to mean that the appeal was deemed to be filed and pending as on 30.06.2019.

After all, the assessee did not have a premonition that on the Budget Day, 2019, on 5th July 2019, the Government would come out with the SVLDR Scheme with so many ifs and buts.

Be that as it may, assuming that the Board wishes to extend the largesse to this category of assessees who would have otherwise missed the SVLDRS caravan, notwithstanding that the law does not actually welcome them, what is the "undertaking" that the Board wants the declarant to make in terms of paragraph (viii) of the Circular dated 25.09.2019 when the fact of the matter is that the potential declarant is withdrawing the appeal itself.

Should we wait for another circular to clarify the clarification issued?

(The views expressed are strictly personal.)

(DISCLAIMER : The views expressed are strictly of the author and Taxindiaonline.com doesn't necessarily subscribe to the same. Taxindiaonline.com Pvt. Ltd. is not responsible or liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone due to any interpretation, error, omission in the articles being hosted on the site)

POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

India's Path to Becoming a Superpower: An Interview with Pratap Singh



Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.