9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (1) TMI 1186 - HC - Service TaxRejection of Petitioner s application for the benefit of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Disputes Resolution) Scheme, 2019 - absence or inadequacy of reasons as to why the Petitioner s application for the benefit of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Disputes Resolution) Scheme, 2019 was rejected - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - In the cases at hand, either there are no remarks or cryptic unclear remarks. The Respondents have filed exhaustive replies seeking to place on record the reasons. Therefore, it is for the first time in this Court an adjudication will have to take place on the basis of replies filed. Such position cannot be countenanced. The Respondents cannot be permitted to abdicate their duty to fill up the Remarks column in SVLDRS-3 in a meaningful manner. The failure to do so is adding to the already crowded docket of this Court. The matters are remanded to emphasis upon and inculcate administrative discipline on the offices of the Respondents to provide reasons as required by the Statue, by setting aside the impugned orders/ communications and directing remedial action. Petition disposed off.
Issues:
Absence or inadequacy of reasons for rejection of applications under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Disputes Resolution) Scheme, 2019. Analysis: The petitions raised a common issue regarding the absence or inadequacy of reasons for rejecting the Petitioners' applications under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Disputes Resolution) Scheme, 2019. The Finance Act, 2019 introduced this scheme, applicable to Customs, Central Excise, and Service Tax matters. The relevant sections of the Finance Act outline the procedure for dealing with declarations by eligible persons. Section 127 specifically addresses the issue of statements by the designated committee, including the issuance of estimates and providing an opportunity for the declarant to be heard before issuing the final statement. The scheme requires the remarks column in Form SVLDRS-3 to include reasons for rejection. The Petitioners had applied under the scheme by filing declarations and received responses in Form SVLDRS-3. However, in some cases, the remarks column was either blank or contained unclear reasons for rejection. The court highlighted that the Designated Committee is obligated to provide discernible reasons for rejection as part of the statutory scheme. The court emphasized the importance of providing reasons to ensure the opportunity for the declarant to challenge the estimate and maintain the integrity of the hearing process. The court found that the Respondents failed to provide meaningful reasons in the remarks column, leading to unnecessary litigation. Consequently, the court quashed the impugned orders/communications and directed the Respondents to fill up the remarks column with discernible reasons in Form SVLDRS-3. If immediate issuance of Form SVLDRS-3 was not feasible, the Respondents were permitted to pass a separate order providing reasons for rejection within eight weeks. This action aimed to uphold administrative discipline and ensure compliance with the statutory requirement of providing reasons for rejection under the scheme. In conclusion, the court disposed of the writ petitions by emphasizing the importance of providing clear and discernible reasons for rejection under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Disputes Resolution) Scheme, 2019, to facilitate a fair and transparent resolution process for the declarants.
|
