9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act it would be evident that the embargo against filing a declaration on the premise that the declarant has been subjected to an enquiry on investigation would only relate to an enquiry or investigation which has been initiated on or before 30.06.2019. In the present case admittedly the investigation was initiated by a issuance of a summon only on 26.09.2019 and thus the rejection / withdrawal of the discharge certificate by invoking Section 125(i)(e) is unsustainable. It may be relevant to refer to the relevant portions of the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of M/S. NEW INDIA CIVIL ERECTORS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [ 2021 (3) TMI 545 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] wherein it was held respondent No. 4 was not justified in rejecting the declaration of the petitioner dated 26-12-2019 on the ground that petitioner was not eligible to file declaration under the category of voluntary disclosure since enquiry was initiated against the petitioner on 19-12-2019 whereafter petitioner flied declaration. Though other contentions were raised viz., that the impugned order suffers from violation of principles of natural justice and the impugned order by a member o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 26.09.2019 and voluntary statement was recorded. Further documents/ details along with workings for Service Tax payable were submitted vide letter dated 09.10.2019. 2.5. Thereafter, the Petitioner received the impugned order dated 17.08.2020 from the Second Respondent stating that the Petitioner was not eligible to file declaration under the category of voluntary disclosure in terms of Section 125(1)(f) of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2019, inasmuch as an investigation has already been initiated against the petitioner and hence the declaration / application filed under Voluntary Disclosure is presumed to have never been made. 3. The writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order dated 17.08.2020 inter-alia on the following ground: a) The Respondent herein who is one of the members of the Designated Committee does not have the power / authority to revoke the Discharge Certificate issued by the Designated Committee. b) The impugned order is made on the basis of a summon dated 26.09.2019 issued by the Central Intelligence Officer, Madurai calling upon the petitioner to furnish documents relating to the period April 2014 August 2017. The above summon assuming constitutes an enquir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o an enquiry or investigation or audit and the amount of duty involved in the said enquiry or investigation or audit has not been quantified on or before the 30th day of June, 2019; 6.1. The above provision had come up for consideration and it has been held by the Bombay High Court that on a cumulative / conjoint reading of clauses (e) and (f) to Section 125(1) of the Act it would be evident that the embargo against filing a declaration on the premise that the declarant has been subjected to an enquiry on investigation would only relate to an enquiry or investigation which has been initiated on or before 30.06.2019. In the present case admittedly the investigation was initiated by a issuance of a summon only on 26.09.2019 and thus the rejection / withdrawal of the discharge certificate by invoking Section 125(i)(e) is unsustainable. In this regard it may be relevant to refer to the relevant portions of the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of New India Civil Erectors Private Limited vs. Union of India and others reported in (2021) 48 GSTL 17) wherein it was held as under: 23.3 Section 125 deals with eligibility to make declaration under the scheme. Sub-section (1) opens ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 30-6-2019. Such a view if taken would be a reasonable construct consistent with the objective of the scheme. 29. That being the position, we are of the opinion that respondent No. 4 was not justified in rejecting the declaration of the petitioner dated 26-12-2019 on the ground that petitioner was not eligible to file declaration under the category of voluntary disclosure since enquiry was initiated against the petitioner on 19-12-2019 whereafter petitioner flied declaration. (emphasis supplied) 7. The above judgment of the Bombay High Court has been followed by this Court in the case of Narayana Associates in W.P.8478 of 2020, wherein after finding that the petitioner's eligibility under the scheme in terms of Section 125(1)(f) of the Act was rejected on finding that the petitioner was in receipt of a letter dated 10.10.2019 calling upon the petitioner to submit various particulars it was held that the above enquiry or investigation being subsequent to 30.06.2019 which has been found to be the cut off date for availing the benefit of the Scheme by the Bombay High Court it was held that it may not be open to the revenue to challenge the correctness of the view in the case of ano ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atter back to the Designated Committee of SVLDRS, to consider the declaration of the Petitioners afresh under the voluntary disclosure category and thereafter grant consequential reliefs. The Hon'ble Court has directed to grant an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioners and thereafter pass a speaking order. As the matter has been remanded for denovo consideration, thus this office has accepted the said order on 18.01.2022 on merit. Further, the Designated committee of SVLDRS has reconsidered the matter and issued discharge Certificate i.e. SVLDRS-4 on 22.04.2022. 14. In light of the discussion and for the reasons assigned above, this writ petition is allowed. Discharge certificate be issued within a period of two weeks from today. 8. Following the judgment of the Bombay High Court and this Court referred supra, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. Though other contentions were raised viz., that the impugned order suffers from violation of principles of natural justice and the impugned order by a member of the Designated Committee revoking / cancelling the discharge certificate by the Designated Committee is without jurisdiction, since this Court has already found tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
