2022 (8) TMI 9 - HC - Service Tax

Seeking direction to respondent authorities to accept payment of tax dues as per the Statement in Form SVLDR-3 issue discharge certificate settling the disputes - HELD THAT - The Court was satisfied that the appellant had made out a prima facie case and precisely for such reason affidavit-in-opposition was directed to be filed by the respondent and the writ petition was directed to be listed on 10th December, 2021 at the top of the list. Further, the learned writ Court had granted permission to file supplementary affidavit, which has also been complied with. Subsequently the matter was heard on 14.12.2021 and on the said date the learned writ Court had directed the matter to be listed for hearing after Christmas Vacation and the respondents were directed to maintain status quo till 11 th January, 2022 and/or until further order, whichever is earlier. Thereafter, the matter was not listed. After affidavit-in-opposition has been filed and the reply has also been filed to the said affidavit-in-opposition, it would be better if decision is taken on merits of the matter since the learned writ Court had recorded in its order dated 25.11.2021 that the allegation of technical glitches made by the appellant was not wrong and they have denied it. In such circumstances, by directing disposal of the representation may not yield any result because already the respondents have filed their affidavit-in-opposition and have made their stand clear. Therefore, the writ petition should be decided on merits. The writ petition is restored to its original file and number to be heard and decided by the learned Single Judge on merits and in accordance with law - Appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against order directing consideration of representation
- Allegation of technical glitches in official portal
- Delay in disposal of representations
- Prima facie case made out by the appellant
- Direction to file affidavit-in-opposition
- Grant of interim protection to the appellant
- Disposal of writ petition on merits

Analysis:
The judgment by the High Court of Calcutta involved an intra-Court appeal against an order directing the consideration of a representation made by the appellant. The appellant sought directions for the acceptance of tax dues, settlement of disputes, and benefits under the SVLDR Scheme. The initial order by the learned Single Judge highlighted the appellant's grievance regarding technical glitches in the official portal, which the respondents disputed. The Court directed the respondents to file an Affidavit-in-Opposition and explain the delay in disposal of the representations. The matter was scheduled for further hearings to address these issues.

The Court acknowledged that a prima facie case was established by the appellant, leading to the direction for filing an affidavit-in-opposition by the respondent. Despite subsequent hearings and interim protections granted to the appellant, the matter was ultimately disposed of on 29.06.2022. The Court, in its decision, set aside the previous order and restored the writ petition for a hearing on merits. The Court emphasized that since the respondents had already filed their affidavit-in-opposition and made their stance clear, directing the disposal of the representation might not be effective. Therefore, the Court decided that the writ petition should be adjudicated based on its merits.

As a result of the judgment, the appeal was allowed, and the writ petition was reinstated for a hearing before the learned Single Judge. The respondent authorities were directed not to take any coercive action against the appellant until the writ petition was heard and resolved. The interim order previously granted was to remain in force for eight weeks or until the writ petition's hearing, whichever occurred earlier. Consequently, any connected applications were also disposed of in light of the judgment.