Supreme Court rejects plea on extending GST amnesty

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to issue directives on extending Goods and Services Tax (GST) amnesty scheme, saying this is “a policy decision exclusively within the domain of the government”.

An SC bench of justices Dhananjaya Y Chadrachud and MR Shah dismissed a petition by a trader from Chhatisgarh’s Bilaspur who urged the court to direct the Centre and GST Council to extend the amnesty scheme, giving more time to small businesses and MSMEs for filing their returns.

The petition by Satyakam Arya assailed the notification issued by the GST Council on June 24, 2020 which gave time till September 30, 2020 for filing of returns between July 2017 and July 2020, capping the late fee at ₹500. For any subsequent delay, a late fee of ₹50 per day was prescribed as penalty.

Arya asked for an extension of the scheme by two months, besides reimbursement of the late fee already collected.

The bench refused. In its order, it said: “In our view, these reliefs, as sought in the petition, pertain in the realm of policy decisions. It would be inappropriate for this court to entertain a petition of this nature, such as extension of amnesty scheme; a cap on the late fee to be collected; exemption of late fee paid for a period between March 25, 2020 and June 30, 2020 and refund of the amount already collected towards late fee.”

The court emphasised that the amnesty scheme was itself a “policy intervention” by the government of India and that “the terms on which the amnesty scheme was executed is in the realm of a policy decision.”

The petition, filed through advocate Aviral Saxena, argued that small traders were not able to avail of these schemes because they lacked the capacity of large businesses to file returns, and also could not step out and do the needful because of the lockdown last year due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

The lawyer argued that the amnesty scheme worked out only in favour of big business houses and hence, it was also being assailed on Article 14 (right to equality) under the Constitution.

The bench, however, remained disinclined to examine the matter. “The question is entirely of policy. How can a court interfere with this under Article 32? These are even otherwise concessions granted as per a policy decision. These are not matters of rights. We cannot issue a mandamus to the government in an amnesty scheme,” it told the lawyer.