9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (7) TMI 266 - HC - Service TaxSabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme 2019 - rejection on the ground that the quantification of tax liability has not been done completely and investigation is still pending - HELD THAT - Issue Notice. List on 26th August 2020.
Issues:
Challenge to rejection of application under Sabka Vishwas Scheme, 2019 without complete quantification of tax liability and pending investigation. Analysis: The High Court of Delhi, comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manmohan and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Narula, heard a petition challenging the decision of respondent No.3 to reject the petitioner's application under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. The rejection was based on the grounds of incomplete quantification of tax liability and an ongoing investigation. The petitioner's counsel argued that two out of three applications under the Scheme had been accepted, highlighting the lack of opportunity for the petitioner to be heard before the impugned order was passed. The petitioner's counsel further pointed out that the Deputy Commissioner, Anti-Evasion had quantified the service tax liability of the petitioner in a letter dated 06th March, 2019, which was communicated to the bank for direct payment to the Central Government. This action indicated that the service tax liability had indeed been quantified, contradicting the grounds for rejection. Additionally, it was argued that the petitioner's case did not fall under any of the ineligible clauses mentioned in sub-Section (1) of Section 125. The Court issued notice to the respondents, with Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar and Mr. Harpreet Singh, representing respondent nos. 1, 2, and 3 respectively, accepting the notice. They were granted permission to file a counter-affidavit within two weeks, with the provision for rejoinders to be filed within two weeks thereafter. The matter was listed for further hearing on 26th August, 2020. The court ordered the immediate uploading of the order on the website and directed the forwarding of a copy to the respective counsels via email.
|
