9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion or audit. Matter remanded back to the designated authority to consider the declaration of the petitioner in terms of the scheme as a valid declaration under the category of investigation, enquiry and audit and thereafter, grant the consequential relief(s) to the petitioner. - UJJAL BHUYAN MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. Ms. Deepali Kamble, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly, Senior Advocate alongwith Mr. J.B. Mishra, Advocates for the Respondents. P.C.:- Heard Ms. Deepali Kamble, learned counsel for the petitioner; and Mr.Jetly, learned senior counsel alongwith Mr. J.B. Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 10th February, 2020 passed by the Designated Committee rejecting its declaration under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. 3. Petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in the business of providing immovable properties on rent to customers. Being a service provider, it was registered as such under the Finance Act, 1994. 4. It is stated that respondent No.3 i.e. Director General of Centr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty-Two Only) in cash against the total admitted liability of ₹ 12,24,99,843/- by them during investigation, which was not paid earlier. However, based on investigation, the amount of Service Tax liability has been quantified as ₹ 17,52,70,590/- (Rupees Seventeen Crore Fifty Two Lakhs Seventy Thousand Five Hundred and Ninety Only) by DGGI. * * * * * * * * * 9. I say that therefore, the contention made by the Petitioners is wrong, and that out of the total admitted tax liability of ₹ 12,24,99,843/- by the Director, an amount of only ₹ 6,88,18,562/- has been discharged by the Petitioners. 9. Ms.Kamble, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that going by the averments made in the reply affidavit of the respondents themselves it is an admitted position that in his statement recorded before the service tax authorities on 24th November, 2016 and 11th May, 2017 Director of the petitioner Mr.Shivshankar Lature had admitted service tax liability of ₹ 12,24,99,843.00. This is admissible quantification under the scheme. She submits that the above quantification was prior to the cut off date of 30th June, 2019. That being the position, respondents could not ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e indirect tax enactment. It is clarified that such written communication will include a letter intimating duty demand; or duty liability admitted by the person during enquiry, investigation or audit; or audit report etc. 48. Thus as per the above clarification, written communication in terms of section 121(r) will include a letter intimating duty demand or duty liability admitted by the person during enquiry, investigation or audit etc. This has been also explained in the form of frequently asked questions (FAQs) prepared by the department on 24th December, 2019. 49. Reverting back to the facts of the present case, we find that on the one hand there is a letter of respondent No.3 to the petitioner quantifying the service tax liability for the period 1st April, 2016 to 31st March, 2017 at ₹ 47,44,937.00 which quantification is before the cut off date of 30th June, 2019 and on the other hand for the second period i.e. from 1st April, 2017 to 30th June, 2017 there is a letter dated 18th June, 2019 of the petitioner addressed to respondent No.3 admitting service tax liability for an amount of ₹ 10,74,011.00 which again is before the cut off date of 30th June, 2019. Thus, p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 45. With respect to cases under enquiry, investigation or audit what is meant by written communication quantifying demand ? Ans. Written communication will include a letter intimating duty/tax demand or duty/tax liability admitted by the person during enquiry, investigation or audit or audit report etc. 15. Finally in Saksham Facility Private Limited Vs. Union of India, 2020-TIOL-2108-HC-MUM-ST , where a similar issue had cropped up, this court reiterated the above position and held as under :- 22.3. Clause (g) of paragraph 10 makes it abundantly clear that cases under an enquiry, investigation or audit where the duty demand had been quantified on or before 30.06.2019 would be eligible under the scheme. The word quantified has been defined under the scheme as a written communication of the amount of duty payable under the indirect tax enactment. In such circumstances, Board clarified that such written communication would include a letter intimating duty demand or duty liability admitted by the person during enquiry, investigation or audit etc. 23. Reverting back to the facts of the present case we find that there is clear admission / acknowledgment by the petitioner about the servi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payable at a slightly lesser amount which in any case would not affect either the tax relief provided under the scheme or the tax dues of the petitioner to be paid under the scheme after availing the tax relief. 19. That apart, in Thought Blurb (supra) we have held that when there is a provision for granting personal hearing in a case where the declarant disputes the estimated amount, it would be in complete defiance of logic and contrary to the very object of the scheme to reject a declaration on the ground of being ineligible without giving a chance to the declarant to explain as to why its declaration should be accepted and relief under the scheme be extended to him. It was held as under :- 51. We have already discussed that under sub sections (2) and (3) of section 127 in a case where the amount estimated by the Designated Committee exceeds the amount declared by the declarant, then an intimation has to be given to the declarant in the specified form about the estimate determined by the Designated Committee which is required to be paid by the declarant. However, before insisting on payment of the excess amount or the higher amount the Designated Committee is required to give an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
