2022 (7) TMI 233 - HC - Service Tax

Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme 2019 (SVLDRS) - Petitioner has averred in the petition that petitioner was logged out / was unable to access the portal and that even any email / sms / intimation was not received by petitioner - HELD THAT - According to the affiant, designated committee has no role to play in issuance of email / sms since it is system generated in an automated manner with minimal human intervention. The affiant has also suggested what petitioner could have done and that the designated committee has not taken any steps to block any account. What is important to note is the fact that petitioner had a serious problem in accessing the portal has not been denied. Petitioner has also annexed screen shots of the portal when petitioner made attempts to find out status of the declaration - In fact, petitioner has strangely even received a message that no taxpayer was found in the credentials or the PAN number mentioned therein. It is found that there was serious problem in the portal otherwise if such taxpayer was not found, petitioner should not have even received a show-cause-notice in the first place. The interest of justice requires that a limited interference is made - Form No. SVLDRS-3 dated 13.03.2020 that has been issued is now set aside - Petitioner is permitted to respond to Form No. SVLDRS-2 that it has received and file Form No. SVLDRS-2A afresh - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues: Impugning Form No. SVLDRS-3 under Sabka Vishwas Scheme 2019, Petitioner's non-receipt of Form SVLDRS-3, Allegations of inability to access portal and non-receipt of communications, Respondent's submission on system-generated emails, Petitioner's difficulty in portal access acknowledged, Setting aside Form SVLDRS-3, Directions for responding to Form SVLDRS-2.

In the present case, the petitioner challenged Form No. SVLDRS-3 issued under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme 2019, alleging non-receipt of the form despite receiving an email without any amount indication. The petitioner had previously filed a declaration under SVLDRS in response to a show-cause notice demanding a duty amount. The petitioner claimed to have faced difficulties in accessing the portal and not receiving any communication, which was supported by the affidavit-in-reply filed by the Principal Commissioner. The respondent argued that the system-generated emails were automated with minimal human intervention and suggested steps the petitioner could have taken. The court noted the petitioner's struggle in accessing the portal, evident from screenshots provided, and acknowledged the serious problem in the system, as the petitioner even received a message stating no taxpayer was found, questioning the issuance of the initial show-cause notice. Consequently, the court, without delving into the merits of the matter, set aside Form No. SVLDRS-3 and allowed the petitioner to respond to Form No. SVLDRS-2, directing the filing of Form No. SVLDRS-2A afresh. If technical issues hindered online filing, the respondent was instructed to inform the petitioner, who could then submit a physical copy or objections. Respondent No. 5 was mandated to provide a personal hearing to the petitioner before passing any order, ensuring advance notice and disclosure of relevant orders or judgments to enable the petitioner's preparedness. Ultimately, the petition was disposed of based on these directions.