Gauhati High Court
M/S Brahmaputra Tele Productions Pvt ... vs The Union Of India And 5 Ors on 28 May, 2021
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2021 GAU 337
Author: N. Kotiswar Singh
Bench: N. Kotiswar Singh
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010076432021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2862/2021
M/S BRAHMAPUTRA TELE PRODUCTIONS PVT LTD
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE
COMPANIES ACT, 1956 AND HAVING ITS OFFICE AT CHRISTIAN BASTI, GS
ROAD, GUWAHATI, ASSAM, AND ITS FACTORY AT GARCHUK, PO AND PS
GARCHUK, DIST KAMRUP GUWAHATI ,REPRESENTED BY SRI SUBODH
NARAYAN PODDAR.
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE FINANCE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE,
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NORTH BLOCK, NEW
DELHI 110001
2:THE UNDER SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
DEPT OF REVENUE
NORTH BLOCK
NEW DELHI 110001
3:DESIGNATED COMMITTEE
REPRESENTING THROUGH PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER
CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
GST BHAWAN
KEDAR ROAD
FANCY BAZAR
GUWAHATI 781001
4:THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER
CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
GUWAHATI
GST BHAWAN
Page No.# 2/4
KEDAR ROAD
GUWAHATI 781001 ASSAM
5:THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
GUWAHATI
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. M L GOPE
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, GST
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. KOTISWAR SINGH
ORDER
Date : 28-05-2021 The Court proceedings have been conducted through video-conference.
2. Heard Ms. N. Hawelia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, GST.
3. Considering the nature of the case and submissions advanced today, this Court is of the view that the present petition can be disposed of at this stage without issuing any formal notice to the respondents.
4. The admitted position is that the petitioner awes certain amount to the Government of India on account of settlement of certain dispute which was resolved under the " Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019" (in short, SVLDRS)" vide Finance Act No.2, 2019 under which the petitioner is supposed to pay a sum of Rs.12,36,844.40/- which the petitioner had agreed to pay by way of instalments, though it was rejected by the authorities.
5. Be that as it may, the petitioner was to make payment by 1 stJuly, 2020. Unfortunately, according to the petitioner, the Covid pandemic struck because of which not only the petitioner's enterprise but also functioning of the many offices of the Government including of the Respondents had been disrupted and, as such, the petitioner could not make the payment. Subsequently, however, when the opportunity came for the petitioner to make payment, the authorities informed the petitioner that the portal for payment has been closed Page No.# 3/4 as the last date of payment had already expired on 1 stJuly, 2020. Accordingly, the petitioner approached the authorities for allowing him to pay the due amounts in instalments, which, however, did not elicit any positive response from the authorities. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing this writ petition seeking a direction to the authorities to accept the payment of the amount due in instalments.
6. As regards this, Mr. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, GST has submitted that if the petitioner is willing to pay the aforesaid amount within 15 days, perhaps, the matter can be sorted out. On the other hand, Ms. Hawelia, learned counsel for the petitioner, has prayed for a longer period as the amount is substantial and sought for at least two months time.
7. In this regard, Mr. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, GST has drawn attention of this Court also to the amount which according to him, the petitioner-company actually owes to the authorities by referring to the letter dated 22.12.2019 of the petitioner where it has been mentioned that the petitioner-company owes Rs.3,90,69,385/- under the SVLDRS which could be paid in 48 equal instalments. On the other hand, Ms. Hawelia has submitted that the aforesaid is the aggregate amount which relates to other financial years also and is not the amount for which the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. She submits that as far as the present petition is concerned, the amount due is only Rs.12,36,844.40/- as mentioned in Mandate Form No.3 under the SVLDRS which the petitioner is seeking to pay.
8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that it may not necessary to dwell on the aggregate amount the petitioner is supposed to pay, except the amount which the petitioner has admitted and willing to pay in this petition. As regards other liabilities, if any, it is a matter to be considered by the authorities on its own merit in accordance with law. However, as far as the amount of Rs.12,36,844.40/- is concerned which is the subject matter of consideration in this petition, the petitioner shall pay the aforesaid admitted amount of Rs.12,36,844.40/- within 45 days from today. As regards the dues mentioned by Mr. Keyal, it is for the petitioner to approach the competent authority for payment and in instalments, if the authorities agree.
9. It is made clear that till payment of the aforesaid amount of Rs.12,36,844.40/- within the aforesaid 45 days, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner as regards the Page No.# 4/4 said amount.
10. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant