2021 (11) TMI 245 - HC - Service Tax

Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 - petitioner was restrained to make the payment by operation of law - payment was made subsequently - HELD THAT - To take certain benefit of service tax, the respondents came out with a scheme namely Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. One was required to make the payment under Scheme of 2019 within the timeframe but the petitioner did not comply the mandate. It may be on account of the order passed by the N.C.L.T. or operation of law but the question would be as to whether this Court can issue a direction going contrary to the Scheme of 2019. It is also when now the scheme is no more exist so as the committee to consider the case of the petitioner. The scheme cannot be made operational by this Court going beyond the period for which it was formulated only for one person or to relax any of the conditions enumerated in the scheme. It is also when the committee under the scheme no more exists. The prayer made in the writ petition cannot be granted for consideration of a case of the petitioner for paying the service tax under the scheme. Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Petitioner seeks direction for consideration under "Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019" after missing payment deadline.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ petition requesting direction on the respondents for considering their case under the "Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019" (Scheme of 2019). The petitioner claimed they were unable to make the payment under the Scheme by the specified deadline due to an order from the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and subsequent legal constraints. The respondents, through their counsel, objected to the petitioner's prayer, arguing that the Scheme was operational until June 30, 2020, and the committee responsible for its implementation no longer existed. The respondents contended that since the petitioner failed to make the payment within the stipulated timeframe as required by the Scheme, they were not entitled to its benefits.

Upon considering the arguments presented by both parties and examining the case records, the Court noted that the Scheme of 2019 was introduced by the respondents to provide relief in service tax matters. It was mandatory to make the payment under the Scheme within the specified timeframe, which the petitioner failed to comply with, possibly due to NCLT's order or legal restrictions. The Court deliberated on whether it had the authority to issue a direction contrary to the provisions of the Scheme, especially considering that the Scheme was no longer in effect, and the committee responsible for case consideration had ceased to exist.

The Court emphasized that it could not revive or alter the Scheme beyond its intended period or relax any conditions set forth in it for the benefit of a single individual, especially when the committee under the Scheme was no longer functional. Consequently, the Court concluded that the prayer made by the petitioner in the writ petition could not be granted for the consideration of their case under the Scheme. As a result, the Court found no justification to accept the petitioner's prayer and dismissed the writ petition accordingly.