2020 (12) TMI 531 - HC - Central Excise

Rejection of Declaration in form SVLDRS-1 - rejection on the ground that the appeal filed by the writ applicant is pending with the Textile Committee (Cess) Tribunal at Mumbai and such tribunal is not included in the definition of Appellate Forums - Appellate Forum for the purpose of Section 121(f) of the SVLDR Scheme - HELD THAT - Mr. Dave, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant has invited the attention of this Court first to the definition to the term Appellate Forum as defined under Section 121 (f) of the Scheme, 2019 - thereafter, Mr. Dave invited the attention of this Court to Section 122, which prescribes as to which particular enactment the scheme would be applicable and in the last, he invited the attention to the provisions of Section 123 of the Scheme, which defines or rather explains the term tax dues . The argument of Mr. Dave is that Section 123(a) of the Scheme only talks about the Appellate Forum. It does not specify about any particular forum. Let Notice be issued to the respondents, returnable on 20.01.2021 .

Summary

Issues:
1. Acceptance of declaration in form SVLDRS-1 by the writ applicant.
2. Inclusion of Textile Committee (Cess) Tribunal as an Appellate Forum under Section 121(f) of the SVLDR Scheme.

Analysis:
1. The judgment revolves around the acceptance of the declaration in form SVLDRS-1 by the writ applicant. The Court noted that the declaration had not been accepted due to the pendency of an appeal filed by the writ applicant with the Textile Committee (Cess) Tribunal at Mumbai. The Court prima facie observed that the Appellate Forum under Section 121(f) of the SVLDR Scheme includes the Supreme Court, High Court, CESTAT, or the Commissioner only. The contention was that the Tribunal in question was not included in this definition.

2. The counsel for the writ applicant directed the Court's attention to the definition of 'Appellate Forum' under Section 121(f) of the Scheme, emphasizing that the term did not specifically mention any particular forum. Additionally, reference was made to Section 122, which outlines the applicable enactments under the scheme, and Section 123, which explains the term 'tax dues.' It was argued that Section 123(a) of the Scheme solely addresses the Appellate Forum without specifying any particular forum. This analysis aimed to establish that the exclusion of the Textile Committee (Cess) Tribunal as an Appellate Forum may not align with the scheme's provisions.

3. Consequently, the Court issued a notice to the respondents, returnable on a specified date, to further deliberate on the matter and address the concerns raised regarding the acceptance of the writ applicant's declaration under the SVLDR Scheme. The case highlights the importance of interpreting statutory provisions accurately and ensuring compliance with the scheme's requirements to facilitate a fair and just resolution in tax matters.