M/S Metrics Promotions And Events 993 vs. Commissioner

Held

The Court held that the petitioner was not entitled to avail the benefits of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, as they failed to deposit the tax amount within the stipulated time, even considering the extended deadline. The Court reasoned that allowing the late deposit would amount to tinkering with the Scheme, which does not provide for any further extension of the last date for depositing the discounted tax amount. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's affirmation of the Allahabad High Court's decision in Ms. Yashi Construction Vs. Union of India and 2 Others, which emphasized that beneficiaries of a scheme must scrupulously abide by its terms and conditions. The ratio decidendi is that a scheme's benefits can only be availed by strictly adhering to its prescribed timelines and conditions, and judicial intervention to extend these timelines would constitute an impermissible modification of the scheme. The Court dismissed the petition, upholding the Revenue's denial of relief to the petitioner.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Metrics Promotions and Events, sought to avail the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, by offering tax payable to the extent of Rs. 3,51,611.60. The Designated Committee issued a statement for depositing this amount on January 22, 2020. The Scheme stipulated a 30-day deposit period. While the government extended the last date for deposit to June 30, 2020, due to the Covid-19 pandemic, the petitioner failed to deposit the amount by this extended deadline. The deposit was eventually made on February 14, 2022. The petitioner approached the High Court seeking a direction to the respondents to accept the late deposit and grant the benefits of the Scheme, which had been denied due to the delayed payment.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to avail the benefits of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, despite depositing the tax amount after the extended deadline, thereby requiring the Court to consider if the Scheme allows for such an extension. This issue turns on the interpretation of the terms and conditions of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, and potentially Section 127 of the Finance Act, 2019. The petitioner argued that the delay in deposit was attributable to circumstances beyond their control and that the Court should direct the respondents to accept the late deposit. The respondents contended that the petitioner failed to abide by the strict terms and conditions of the Scheme, citing the Division Bench order of the Allahabad High Court in Ms. Yashi Construction Vs. Union of India and 2 Others, which was upheld by the Supreme Court.