2015 (12) TMI 417 - HC - Service Tax

Request to issue discharge certificate for declaration filed under VCES - Held that - Petitioner submitted that for the relief claimed in the writ petition, the petitioner has sent a letter dated 26.12.2014 (Annexure P-15) to respondent No.1, but no action has so far been taken thereon. - petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.1 to take a decision on the letter dated 26.12.2014 (Annexure P-15), in accordance with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. As regards, challenge to the show cause notice, the petitioner shall file a detailed and comprehensive representation. In case any such representation is filed by the petitioner, the same shall be decided by the competent authority expeditiously in accordance with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. - Petition disposed of.

Summary

Issues:
1. Issuance of discharge certificate under Voluntary Compliance Encouragement Scheme (VCES).
2. Prohibition on summons and investigation against the petitioner.
3. Quashing of show cause notice and summons issued by respondent No.3.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought a writ for a discharge certificate under VCES for service tax paid from 1.7.2010 to 31.12.2012. The petitioner filed a declaration in 2013, which was accepted by respondent No.1, authorizing payment in installments. Despite compliance, respondent No.1 did not issue the discharge certificate. The history of correspondence and verification by authorities was detailed, leading to the rejection of the declaration initially, which was later allowed on appeal. The petitioner requested the discharge certificate after paying the service tax, but respondent No.1 did not issue it. The court directed respondent No.1 to decide on the request within a month, ensuring a fair hearing to the petitioner.

2. The petitioner also sought a writ of prohibition against respondent No.2 from issuing summons and conducting investigations based on records already submitted for VCES. The petitioner claimed that all required records had been provided, and audits had been completed. However, respondent No.2 issued multiple summons and a show cause notice for recovery of additional service tax. The court directed the petitioner to file a detailed representation challenging the show cause notice, to be decided expeditiously after a fair hearing.

3. The show cause notice issued by respondent No.3 demanded recovery of a significant amount as service tax, despite the petitioner having already deposited a substantial sum. The petitioner contested the notice, seeking relief through the writ petition. The court instructed the competent authority to consider any representation filed by the petitioner, ensuring a fair hearing and a prompt decision in accordance with the law.

This judgment addresses the petitioner's concerns regarding the issuance of a discharge certificate under VCES, prohibition on unnecessary investigations, and the challenge against the show cause notice for additional service tax. It emphasizes fair hearings, compliance with the law, and timely decision-making by the concerned authorities.