2022 (9) TMI 855 - HC - Service Tax

Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 - whether any leeway was granted to any other person, concerning the extension of the deadline provided in the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019? - HELD THAT - The respondents/Revenue are expected to deal with the petitioner s representation, having regard to what has been observed by the coordinate bench on 11.05.2022. Since the same has not been done thus far, the writ petition is disposed of, once again, with a direction to the respondents/Revenue to pass an order, which would deal with the issue highlighted hereinabove, and in the order dated 11.05.2022. The respondents/revenue will take the necessary steps and pass a fresh order, within the next six weeks.

Issues involved:
1. Interpretation of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 for extension of time limit for depositing the declared amount.
2. Consideration of medical condition (cancer) of the petitioner for leniency in compliance.
3. Compliance with court directions and previous orders by the respondents/Revenue.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Interpretation of the Scheme for extension of time limit
The petitioner sought relief under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, for setting aside recovery notices and directing payment. The petitioner failed to deposit the declared amount within the prescribed timeframe due to financial constraints, leading to the current litigation. Despite acknowledging that the court cannot generally extend the Scheme's timeframe, the court considered the petitioner's circumstances, especially being a cancer patient. The court directed the concerned authority to treat the writ petition as a representation and decide on extending the deadline, similar to any previous cases, within eight weeks.

Issue 2: Consideration of medical condition for leniency
The petitioner's counsel highlighted the petitioner's cancer diagnosis and ongoing correspondence with the respondents/Revenue post-deadline for depositing the amount. The court, noting the exceptional circumstances, directed the concerned authority to evaluate the petitioner's case for possible extension, considering any precedents where leeway was granted. The court emphasized the importance of considering the petitioner's health condition while addressing the compliance issue.

Issue 3: Compliance with court directions and previous orders
The court noted the petitioner's communication with the respondents/Revenue, referencing judgments from other High Courts, seeking an extension for depositing the amount. However, the respondents' response did not address the issue of granting leeway to others under the Scheme. The court reiterated the need for the respondents/Revenue to act on the petitioner's representation promptly, in line with the previous court order and observations. A fresh order was directed to be passed within six weeks to resolve the outstanding issues, ensuring compliance with court directions.

In conclusion, the judgment delves into the complexities of balancing legal compliance with compassionate considerations, emphasizing the need for authorities to assess cases individually, especially when health conditions impact timely compliance with legal obligations. The court's meticulous approach ensures a fair and just resolution while upholding the principles of law and equity.

← Previous Next →