9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 1267X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... signatory of the petitioner Company to appear before him on 22.02.2018, since its affairs were being enquired by him. The Managing Director appeared before the said officer and his statement was also duly recorded. On being summoned again, he appeared before the said officer on 28.09.2018 and submitted further details. Vide letter dated 12.06.2019, the petitioner submitted the details of gross income and service tax calculation for the financial years 2014-15 to June 2017. This was duly certified by their Chartered Accountant also. The petitioner had declared their service tax liability at Rs. 1,05,91,153/- for the period 01.04.2014 to 30.06.2017. Thereafter, nothing was heard from the Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Coimbatore Zonal Limit. 3.In the meanwhile, the Government of India notified Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 vide Chapter V of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2019. According to Circular No.1071/4/2019-CX.8 dated 27.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, the object of the scheme is to unload the baggage relating to the legacy taxes viz. Central Excise and Service Tax that have been subsumed under GST and allow busine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y involved in the said enquiry or investigation or audit was not quantified on or before 30.06.2019. Since this fundamental requirement regarding eligibility was not fulfilled in the instant case, the designated committee rightly passed the impugned order. According to the learned Standing counsel, the impugned order does not warrant any interference. He placed reliance on the decision of the Delhi High Court reported in 2020[42] G.S.T.L.24(Chaque Jour HR Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Ors.). He thus prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 7.I carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the materials on record. 8.The stand of the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner is that the impugned order has been passed without jurisdiction. On the other hand, the contention of the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents is that the petitioner lacked the eligibility to apply under the scheme. When two roads diverge in a yellow wood, one cannot travel both (with due apologies to Robert Frost). When divergent submissions are made, the outcome of the proceedings often depends on how the issue is formulated. 9.Let me undertake a detour. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he list of persons not eligible to make a declaration under the scheme has been catalogued in Section 125. Section 126 authorizes the designated committee to verify the correctness of the declaration and issue statement. After the amount determined by the committee is paid, discharge certificate shall be issued under Section 129. The Central Government had issued Sabka Vishwas(Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme Rules, 2019 vide Notification No.04/2019 Central Excise-NT dated 21.08.2019. It contemplates that the declarant must electronically make a declaration in Form SVLDRS-1 on or before 31.12.2019. On receipt of declaration, an auto acknowledgement bearing an unique reference number shall be generated by the system. The designated committee shall verify the declaration based on the particulars furnished by the declarants as well as the record available with the department. The designated committee shall within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of the declaration, issue a statement in Form SVLDRS-3 setting forth therein the particulars of the amount payable by the declarant. 12.Rule 6(6) of Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme Rules, 2019 states that within ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d or rejected at that stage itself. Having moved to the next stage, the designated committee cannot retrace its steps. The designated committee is a creature of statute. It came into existence by virtue of the provisions of Chapter V of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2019. If the impugned order is sustained, it would mean that the designated committee has been conferred with absolute power of review, when what has been conferred is only limited power of review, namely, the power to correct the arithmetical or clerical error. It cannot revisit the issue on merits, having once made the determination under Section 127(4) of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2019 r/w. Rule 6 of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme Rules, 2019. I therefore have no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the designated committee did not have the jurisdiction to issue the impugned order. On this sole ground, the impugned order is liable to be quashed. It is accordingly quashed. 15.The impugned order is vulnerable on yet another ground. The Government announced the scheme to clear tax dues. The writ petitioner applied under the scheme. This application was verified and its liability was determined by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
