9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... category. Logical corollary to this would be that an enquiry or investigation or audit post 30th June, 2019 would not act as a bar to the filing of declaration under the voluntary disclosure category. In the facts of that case, the enquiry was initiated after 30th June, 2019. In the present case, this Court was of the opinion that the respondents were not justified in rejecting the declaration of the petitioner dated 26th December, 2019 on the ground that the petitioner was not eligible to file declaration under the category of voluntary disclosure since enquiry was initiated against the petitioner on 19th December, 2019. This Court held that though under Section 125(1)(f) of the said Scheme does not mention the date 30th June, 2019 by simply saying that a person making a voluntary disclosure after being subjected to any enquiry or investigation or audit would not be eligible to make a declaration, the said provision if read and understood in the proper context would mean making of a voluntary disclosure after being subjected to an enquiry or investigation or audit on or before 30th June, 2019. Such a view if taken would be a reasonable construct, consistent with the objecti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondents waives service. By consent of parties, petition is heard finally. 2. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari for quashing and setting aside the impugned orders dated 9th December, 2020 and 20th February, 2020 annexed at Exhibits A1 and A2 respectively. 3. On 5th July, 2019, the Central Government proposed Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (for short the said Scheme ) in the budget for 2019-20 with an aim to assist taxpayers in clearing the baggage of disputes under erstwhile laws (service tax and central excise) which are subsumed in the Goods and Services Tax (GST). Vide notification dated 21st August, 2019, the said Scheme was notified and introduced w.e.f. 1st September, 2020. On 4th September, 2019, the respondents issued summons to the petitioner for giving oral evidence or to submit relevant documents. 4. On 9th September, 2019, the petitioner filed Electronic Declaration Form under SVLRDS-1 on CBEC website under voluntary category and declared ₹ 36,24,108/- as the amount of tax dues for the period 1st September, 2015 to 30th June, 2017. Ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 8. Mr. Bangur, learned counsel for the respondents invited our attention to various paragraphs of the said judgment in case of M/s. New India Civil Erectors Private Limited (supra) and would submit that even if the summons were issued by the respondents after 30th June, 2019, the powers of the respondents under Section 129(2)(c) of the said Scheme to continue the investigation are not taken away. He submits that if the particulars furnished by the petitioner in the declaration are found to be false within a period of one year of issuance of discharge certificate, it shall be presumed as if declaration was never made and proceedings under the applicable indirect tax enactment shall be instituted. 9. In his rejoinder arguments, Mr. Raichandani, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in this case, the petitioner had submitted a declaration under voluntary category and had paid the tax due as payable. He does not dispute the powers of the respondents to take action under Section 129(2)(c), if within a period of one year of issuance of discharge certificate, if the respondents find any material particular as furnished by the petitioner in declaration as false. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd remanded the matter back to the Authority for taking a fresh decision on the declaration filed by the petitioner therein treating the same as a valid declaration under the voluntary disclosure category and thereafter to grant the admissible relief to the petitioner after giving an opportunity of hearing. 13. The principles laid down by this Court in case of M/s. New India Civil Erectors Private Limited (supra) would apply to the facts of this case. We do not propose to take any different view in this matter. 14. In the facts of this case also the respondents had issued a summons only on 30th August, 2019 i.e. after 30th June, 2019 and thus summons issued after the cut-off date of 30th June, 2019 could not be the ground for declaring the application filed by the petitioner under SVLRDS-1 ineligible. In our view, the stand taken by the respondents is contrary to the principles of law laid down by this Court in case of M/s. New India Civil Erectors Private Limited (supra) and also contrary to the objectives, purposes and intent of the said Scheme introduced by the Central Government. The respondents would have been justified to declare the petitioner ineligible to file decl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
