News Update

PLI scheme for electronics manufacturing sees incremental investment of Rs 8,390 CrG20 finance leaders agree to tax super-rich but forum not yet readyDPIIT promotes green logistics industry balancing economic growth and environmentIndia, US ink pact to stymie illegal trafficking of cultural propertyRailways expands tracks by 31,180 kmFroth in Yamuna river: Delhi complains to Centre against UP and HaryanaGovt to enhance reach of Indian Digital Public InfrastructureFormer BJP Minister says BJP has totally failed as Opposition in KarnatakaGovt provides incentives to small tea growersEU penalises 5 countries for infringing budget rulesI-T-Transaction involving transfer of unutilised shares cannot be deemed to be sale of shares so as to attract levy of Long Term Capital Gain u/s 112: ITATChina says Relations with Japan at critical stageST - Once the activity of appellant that is of forfeituring the amount of earnest money is not a declared service, question of retaining said money as consideration for rendering such service becomes absolutely redundant: CESTATEU medicines regulator disapproves Alzheimer’s new drugSC says no restrictions on voluntary name banners along Kanwar route eateriesFM favours debt reduction but sans affecting economic growthKargil Victory Day: PM warns Pak against practising terrorismChina pumps in subsidies worth USD 41 bn into car sectorMisc - Payments made to Government cannot be deemed to be a tax merely because statute provides for their recovery as arrears: SC CBMisc - Royalty not a tax; royalty is contractual consideration paid by mining lessee to lessor for enjoyment of mineral rights & liability to pay royalty arises out of contractual conditions of mining lease: SC CBMisc - Since power to tax mineral rights is provided for in Entry 50 of List II, Parliament cannot use its residuary powers in this subject matter: SC CBCus - Owner of goods has a liability to pay customs duty even after confiscated goods are redeemed on payment of fine - Interest follows: SC
 
Settlement still a viable option?

MARCH 21, 2023

By Anurag Kapur, Associate Partner & Sonam Yadav, Senior Associate, Lakshmikumaran and Sridharan Attorneys

THE Customs and Central Excise Settlement Commission ('Settlement Commission') was constituted under the Central Excise Act, 1944 with the aim of providing alternate dispute resolution mechanism to taxpayers who wanted to resolve tax disputes in the spirit of conciliation rather than litigation.

The impediment in speedy resolution by Settlement Commission was the absence of a definite time frame for disposal of applications.This seems to have caught the attention of Central Government who has now proposed a time bound resolution by the Settlement Commission.

The Finance Bill, 2023 ('Bill') proposes to amend Section 127C of the Customs Act, 1961by inserting sub-section (8A) which prescribes a time limit of 9 months (extendable by 3 months) for passing an order on the application. This time limit shall be reckoned from the last day of the month in which the application under Section 127B is filed by the applicant. Interestingly, the time limit to dispose application was introduced back in 2007also but was omitted in 2015 1. It has now been proposed to be re-introduced by this Bill.

While the proposed amendment providing for time bound disposal of applications may be a welcome step, one cannot ignore that it could produce an incongruous result of shutting the doors of settlement for an applicant, if no order is passed within the stipulated period.

The power of Settlement Commission to waive/reduce penalty and grant immunity from prosecution has been an important guiding factor for an applicant to opt for this route, as opposed to going through the perils of a long-drawn litigation. However, to approach the Settlement Commission, the applicant must make a true and full disclosure of his duty liability. After the proposed amendment comes into effect, one can't help but wonder if this would prove to be a double-edged sword for the applicants. Not only does the adjudicating Authority not have the power to grant immunity from prosecution, but disclosures made before the Settlement Commission may also be used by them to impose usury penalties on the applicants.

In the past, many assesses have challenged similar provisions existing under different statutes 2. Various Courts have read down the provisions to hold that proceedings before the Settlement Commission would abate only if it failed to pass an order within the specified period for "reasons attributable to applicant". Such reasons would generally depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and would need to be analysed independently.

In our view, the proposed amendments relating to abatement of proceedings may not only inhibit a bona fide defaulter from approaching the Settlement Commission but also proliferate litigation, much against the spirit of Settlement Commission. Only time will tell whether this proposed amendment can be viewed as a relief or setback to an applicant who genuinely seeks settlement.

[The views expressed are strictly personal.]

___________________________________

1 Omitted w.e.f 14.05.2015 by s. 87 of the Finance Act, 2015 (20 of 2015)

2 Section 245HA of the Income Tax Act, 1961; Section 32(F)6of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

(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

Dr. Shailendra Kumar, Chairman, TIOL Knowledge Foundation, addressing the gathering



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