Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2022 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (3) TMI 322 - HC - Central ExciseIssuance of a writ of declaration to confirm the correctness of the Form SVLDRS 1 dated December 12, 2019 - impugned order dismissed the writ petition solely on the ground that the appellant had approached the Court after expiry of the scheme, which expired on 30th June, 2020 - non-application of mind - HELD THAT:- The appellant had exercised the opportunity provided under Rule 6 (4) of the said Rules. Sub Rule (4) of Rule 6 provides for making a written submission, which was exercised by the appellant. The proviso to Rule 6(4) provides that if no such agreement or disagreement is indicated till the date of personal hearing and the declarant does not appear before the Designated Committee for personal hearing, the Committee shall decide the matter based on available records. Thus, even in cases where an ex parte decision is taken, the Committee shall decide the matter based on available records. In the instant case, the appellant had filed electronically Form SVLDRS 2A indicating the disagreement and requesting for rectification of the defect. The appellant also sought for permission to file written submission, which was granted. In the written submission, the appellant had pointed out that opportunity of personal hearing was granted on 20th January, 2020. Further, the appellant had mentioned that the Tribunal had directed deposit of ₹ 20 lakhs within a period of eight weeks from the date of the order, and the direction was complied with. The copy of the order passed by the Tribunal was enclosed as exhibit 1. Further, the appellant enclosed the copies of the challan evidencing payment of pre-deposit of ₹ 20 lakhs, which was enclosed as exhibit – 2 - the appellant submitted that it had paid pre-deposit amount of ₹ 20 lakhs and produced the copy of the challans evidencing payment of the pre-deposit, requested to issue Form SVLDRS 3 by reckoning the said predeposit amount. The Form SVLDRS 2A indicates that all the exhibits were uploaded along with the said Form. If such is the scheme of the Act and the Rules and if the authority has to take a decision based on the records produced by the appellant / assessee, it goes without saying that an order with reasons is required to be passed. Probably, the electronic Form SVLDRS 3 does not specifically provide a column but however, we find from the said statutory form, there is a column indicated as "remarks”. If for some reason the Designated committee was of the opinion that the pre-deposit amount of ₹ 20 lakhs cannot be reckoned (which cannot be done by the Designated Committee as the statute provides for the same), the Designated Committee was bound to give reasons in the remarks column while issuing Form SVLDRS 3 - the decision of the Designated Committee has to be held to be devoid of reasons and outcome of total non-application of mind. The order passed in the writ petition is set aside. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed - Form SVLDRS 3 is set aside and the Designated Committee is directed to reckon the pre-deposit of ₹ 20 lakhs made by the appellant pursuant to the directions issued by the Tribunal and issue fresh Form SVLDRS 3 - appeal allowed.
|