K.Biju vs. Assistant Commissioner, Special Circle, SGST Dept.

Facts

The petitioner, K. Biju, proprietor of M/s. Beena Steels, was subjected to a reassessment under the erstwhile KVAT Act for the year 2017-18, resulting in Ext.P1 order. He had filed a statutory appeal against this order. Subsequently, the Kerala Finance Act, 2021, introduced an Amnesty Scheme, later amended in 2021. The petitioner sought to avail this scheme from the 1st respondent, the Assistant Commissioner, SGST Department. However, his request was denied on the grounds that Ext.P1 order pertained to 'collected tax' and not 'assessed tax', which the respondent deemed ineligible for the scheme's benefits.

Held

The Court held that the Amnesty Scheme of 2020, as amended in 2021, does not make any distinction between 'collected tax' and 'assessed tax'. The benefit of the scheme is available to all assesses who opt for it, provided they meet the stipulated conditions. The Court found no material on record to suggest that the petitioner did not fall within the scope of the Amnesty Scheme. It reasoned that a benefit introduced by the government should not be denied on arbitrary grounds or conditions not contemplated by the scheme itself. The Court emphasized that a condition not explicitly mentioned in the scheme cannot be imposed by tax officers through ingenious or unwarranted interpretations. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme if he opts for it within the prescribed time. The Court directed that if the petitioner applies to the 1st respondent within seven days of receiving the judgment, the respondent shall pass orders within seven days thereafter, and the web portal shall be kept open for the petitioner to file the application.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Amnesty Scheme, introduced by the Kerala Finance Act, 2020, as amended by the Finance Act of 2021, distinguishes between 'assessed tax' and 'collected tax' for the purpose of granting its benefits? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the Amnesty Scheme does not contemplate any distinction between 'assessed tax' and 'collected tax' and that he is therefore entitled to its benefits. Respondents' contention: The learned Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner's claim was denied because the tax amount in question fell under the category of 'collected tax', implying this category was not eligible for the Amnesty Scheme.