2022 (1) TMI 866 - HC - Service Tax

Seeking to re-consider the petitioner s request for benefit under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 - scheme was issued on 21/06/2020 demanding the entire amount of liability on the premise that the petitioner had not made any application under the Scheme - HELD THAT - Perusal of the form submitted by the petitioner indicates that the respondent No.2 found that there was no specific quantification done as a result of which the petitioner has been denied benefit of the said Scheme. The petitioner had moved his application with the respondent No.2 but after making enquiries with the respondent No.3 which reported not receiving any application from the petitioner, his case has not been considered for benefit under the said Scheme. It is undisputed that such application under the Scheme was made to the respondent No.2 on 31/12/2019 within time. In that view of the matter the consideration of the petitioner s claim for relief under SVLDR Scheme 2019 ought to be undertaken by respondent Nos.2 and 3. The respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed to reconsider the form submitted by the petitioner under the SVLDR Scheme 2019 dated 31/12/2019 in the light of Circular dated 27/08/2019 - application allowed.

Issues involved:
1. Re-consideration of petitioner's request for benefit under SVLDR Scheme, 2019.
2. Denial of benefit under the SVLDR Scheme by respondent Nos.2 and 3.
3. Non-consideration of petitioner's claim for relief under SVLDR Scheme, 2019.
4. Direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to reconsider the petitioner's submission under SVLDR Scheme, 2019.

Issue 1: Re-consideration of petitioner's request for benefit under SVLDR Scheme, 2019
The petitioner sought a direction for respondent Nos.2 and 3 to re-consider the request for benefit under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, which was initially rejected. The petitioner had made a declaration under the SVLDR Scheme on 31/12/2019 after appearing before respondent No.2 in response to a summons issued under the Central Excise Act. However, a show cause notice was issued on 21/06/2020 demanding the entire liability amount, alleging that no application was made under the SVLDR Scheme. The petitioner approached the Court seeking relief.

Issue 2: Denial of benefit under the SVLDR Scheme by respondent Nos.2 and 3
Upon examination of the petitioner's submission and relevant Circular dated 27/08/2019, it was found that the quantification of liability was not specific, leading to the denial of benefits under the SVLDR Scheme. The petitioner had submitted the application within the stipulated time to respondent No.2, but respondent No.3 reported not receiving any application. Consequently, the petitioner's claim for relief under the SVLDR Scheme was not considered. The Court directed respondent Nos.2 and 3 to re-evaluate the petitioner's submission in light of the Circular dated 27/08/2019.

Issue 3: Non-consideration of petitioner's claim for relief under SVLDR Scheme, 2019
The Court observed that the petitioner had timely submitted the application under the SVLDR Scheme on 31/12/2019 to respondent No.2. Despite this, respondent Nos.2 and 3 failed to consider the petitioner's claim for relief under the Scheme. It was established that the petitioner's application was indeed made within the required timeframe, warranting a re-consideration of the petitioner's case for relief under the SVLDR Scheme by the concerned respondents.

Issue 4: Direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to reconsider the petitioner's submission under SVLDR Scheme, 2019
In light of the above findings, the Court directed respondent Nos.2 and 3 to reassess the form submitted by the petitioner under the SVLDR Scheme, 2019, dated 31/12/2019, taking into account the Circular dated 27/08/2019. The respondents were instructed to independently evaluate the petitioner's case and make a decision accordingly. Additionally, the Court ordered that the show cause notice issued on 21/06/2020 should not be enforced until a decision is reached by respondent Nos.2 and 3 regarding the petitioner's submission. The Court kept all points on merits open and made the rule absolute with no order as to costs.

This comprehensive analysis highlights the key issues addressed in the judgment, emphasizing the Court's directives and considerations regarding the petitioner's request for relief under the SVLDR Scheme, 2019.

← Previous Next →