In the present case, the respondent is not entitled to claim CENVAT credit in the manner and method it has been done. CENVAT Credit cannot be carried forward as input tax credit and there cannot be any adjustment on predeposit as the respondent has not filed GST TRAN-1. Therefore, the CENVAT credit cannot be transformed into input tax credit. The claim of CENVAT credit which has become time barred cannot be adjusted in the matter in the manner and method it has been done by the learned Single Judge.
SVLDR Scheme —- The appellant Designated Committee, Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme and Others have filed writ appeal challenging the order dated 19.8.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge. The respondent submitted an application in SVLDRS-1, as provided under the Scheme on 28.12.2019. The respondent sought relief u/s 124 (1)(a) of the Scheme in respect of the declaration and the gross amount payable was Rs. 6,69,16,262/- (i.e., 50% of Rs. 13,38,22,524/-). The said amount was reduced by the pre-deposit of Rs. 5,23,24,181/- and the final tax dues less tax relief payable by the declarant was reflected in Form SVLDRS-1 Rs. 1,45,87,081/-. The respondent submitted that the 1st appellant disallowed the pre-deposit of Rs. 4,15,14,081/- (i.e., the amount of CENVAT credit). Consequently, the 1st appellant estimated the final tax payable by the respondent as Rs. 5,62,21,162/-. The respondent being aggrieved by the statement issued in Form SVLDRS-3 dated 29.2.2020 filed a writ petition. The learned Single Judge has allowed the petition of the respondent. The revenue has disputed the availment and utilization of CENVAT credit of Rs. 4,15,14,081/- and submitted that the learned Single Judge has erred in law and in facts by deciding the matter in favour of the respondent. The court observed that the respondent has not filed ST-3 returns till the intervention of the department. As the respondent has not filed the GST TRAN-1, he is not eligible on account of Rule 6(1) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2017. The Designated Committee was justified in passing the order.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court set aside the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
In the present case, the respondent is not entitled to claim CENVAT credit in the manner and method it has been done. CENVAT Credit cannot be carried forward as input tax credit and there cannot be any adjustment on predeposit as the respondent has not filed GST TRAN-1. Therefore, the CENVAT credit cannot be transformed into input tax credit. The claim of CENVAT credit which has become time barred cannot be adjusted in the matter in the manner and method it has been done by the learned Single Judge.
SVLDR Scheme —- The appellant Designated Committee, Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme and Others have filed writ appeal challenging the order dated 19.8.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge. The respondent submitted an application in SVLDRS-1, as provided under the Scheme on 28.12.2019. The respondent sought relief u/s 124 (1)(a) of the Scheme in respect of the declaration and the gross amount payable was Rs. 6,69,16,262/- (i.e., 50% of Rs. 13,38,22,524/-). The said amount was reduced by the pre-deposit of Rs. 5,23,24,181/- and the final tax dues less tax relief payable by the declarant was reflected in Form SVLDRS-1 Rs. 1,45,87,081/-. The respondent submitted that the 1st appellant disallowed the pre-deposit of Rs. 4,15,14,081/- (i.e., the amount of CENVAT credit). Consequently, the 1st appellant estimated the final tax payable by the respondent as Rs. 5,62,21,162/-. The respondent being aggrieved by the statement issued in Form SVLDRS-3 dated 29.2.2020 filed a writ petition. The learned Single Judge has allowed the petition of the respondent. The revenue has disputed the availment and utilization of CENVAT credit of Rs. 4,15,14,081/- and submitted that the learned Single Judge has erred in law and in facts by deciding the matter in favour of the respondent. The court observed that the respondent has not filed ST-3 returns till the intervention of the department. As the respondent has not filed the GST TRAN-1, he is not eligible on account of Rule 6(1) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2017. The Designated Committee was justified in passing the order.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court set aside the order passed by the learned Single Judge.