PARIJAT VYAPPAR (P.) LTD. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the time of moving the writ-petition a point of law arose relating to the interpretation of Section 107 and Section 110 of the Service Tax Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme, 2013 and the respective Advocates have addressed the Court on the point of law. Since the facts are not disputed, this Court proceeded to decide the writ-petition on the question of law agitated by the respective counsels. The aforesaid scheme came into effect on and from May 10, 2013 for immunity against the penalty, interest and other proceedings against the defaulter of the service tax. The person who defaulted in deposit of the service tax may make a declaration before the designated authority on/or before December 31, 2013 in a prescribed manner. Section 107 of the said scheme further provided that such declaration is required to be acknowledged by the designated authority in such form and manner as may be prescribed and the declarant was statutorily bound to pay 50% of the tax dues as declared in the prescribed form within December 31, 2013. Sub-section (4) of Section 107 of the said scheme relates to the deposit of the balance amount within June 30, 2014 whereas the proviso appended thereto provides for an extension of time for deposit till December 31, 2014 subject, however, to the payment of interest fixed under Section 73B or Section 75 of the Finance Act. Section 110 of the said scheme empoweres the authorities to recover the dues along with the interest under the provisions of Section 87 of the Finance Act whereas Section 109 bestowed further power upon the authority to forfeit the amount paid in pursuance of the declaration.

(2.) The 'Tax Dues' as defined in Section 105(e) of the said scheme is to mean the service tax dues payable under the said Chapter or any amount due or payable under Section 73A thereof for the period beginning from October 1, 2007 and ending on December 31, 2012 including a cess leviable thereon under any other Act for the time being in force, but not paid as on the 1st day of March, 2013.

(3.) Mr. Bose, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners raised a point that when the proviso appended to Section 107 entitles the declarant to pay the amount after the period provided under sub-section (3) and sub-section (4) with interest till December 31, 2014, the authorities cannot take any recourse for recovery thereof including the steps for arrest of the declarant. He further submits that Section 110 of the said scheme clearly provides for modes of recovery under Section 87 of the Finance Act and, therefore, the authorities cannot take recourse to any other provisions except the one provided therein. Lastly it is submitted that the petitioner is all along ready to deposit the balance amount of the 'tax dues' with interest under the proviso to the aforesaid section and, therefore, action of the authorities in taking recourse to other provisions except the provision under Section 87 of the said Chapter is invalid, illegal and beyond the boundary set by the said scheme.