TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 519X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alisation of locked up revenue. The scheme has been brought in to have amicable resolution of disputes securing interest of revenue and start the new GST regime and to give benefit to eligible persons participating in the scheme of waiver of interest, fine, penalty, immunity from prosecution. It has been observed that non compliance of principles of natural justice would impeach the decision making process rendering the decision invalid in law. In case of CHAQUE JOUR HR SERVICES PVT. LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA ORS. [ 2020 (3) TMI 659 - DELHI HIGH COURT] , Delhi High Court, while application under SVLDRS had been rejected by the authority on the premise that the disputed amount was not quantified and communicated prior to 30.6.2019 finding that the impugned order has been passed without hearing petitioner had set aside the impugned order and the matter was remanded to competent authority to hear the petitioner before passing order. It is deemed appropriate that petitioner may have an opportunity of hearing. It is considered appropriate to set aside the impugned statement SVLDRS-3 dated 19th February, 2020 - petition disposed off. - WRIT PETITION (L) No. 4156 OF 2020 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, it has paid service tax of ₹ 2,62,21,678/-. However, due to ongoing disputes, necessary documents / challans could not be traced and produced. 6. While aforesaid proceedings were in progress, a scheme referred to as Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (for short SVLDRS ) had been introduced with effect from 1st September, 2019. A notification dated 21st August, 2019 had been issued, framing Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Rules, 2019 . 7. Chapter V of the Finance Act comprising sections 120 to 135 formulates the scheme providing for declaration of tax dues and payments by eligible persons and immunity from penalty, interest, prosecution etc. Section 123 under chapter V refers to tax dues to mean, inter alia, under clause (b) where a show-cause notice under any of the indirect tax enactments has been received by the declarant on or before 30th June, 2019, then the amount of duty, stated to be payable by declarant in the notice. Section 124 of the scheme is in respect of reliefs available to a declarant Section 124(2) of the scheme provides for, inter alia, deduction of pre-deposited amount or amount paid during inquiry, investigation or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scheme, applied online under Litigation Category under sub-category show-cause notice involving Duty Pending making a declaration in Form SVLDRS-1 dated 28th December, 2019. In the declaration, the petitioner had referred to show-cause notice amount of ₹ 9,27,39,336/-, pre-deposit amount as ₹ 2,62,21,678/-, and revenue dues payable as per the scheme to be ₹ 2,01,47,991/-. 12. Respondent No. 4 had issued an estimate in Form SVLDRS-2 dated 22.1.2020 stating that amount payable by petitioner is ₹ 2,93,40,631/- considering predeposit amount of ₹ 1,83,35,195/-. The petitioners were advised to submit Form2A in case of disagreement and a date and time of personal hearing if desired. In response, petitioner filed Form No. SVLDRS-2A dated 27.1.2019, disagreeing with the estimate under SVLDR-2, stating that the amount deposited is ₹ 2,62,21,678/- and that they had challans reflecting the same. The petitioner had also with an intention to pay the dues for discharge of service tax liability under under Sabka Vishwas scheme had approached the assistant director DGGSTI Zonal Unit with a view to de-freeze its bank account. 13. It appears that a declaratio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner either on email id or by SMS on the registered mobile phone. As to why the communications were not issued on email id or for that matter on the mobile phone is not coming forth. He, therefore, submits that SVLDR-3 declaration is patently illegal as the petitioners have lost an opportunity of personal hearing, explaining / supporting claim of the payments, as referred to in the declaration. The impugned order is, thus, infirm, passed in violation of noble principles of natural justice and the same deserves to be set aside. It is contended that a hyper technical approach is being adopted. 17. The learned counsel for the petitioner purports to refer to and rely on a decisions of a division bench (of which one of us Abhay Ahuja, J. as a member) of this court dated 25 th September, 2020 in the case of Capgemini Technology Services India Ltd. Vs. Union of India Writ Petition (St.) No. 5629 of 2020, dated 25.9.2020.; and Thought Blurb Vs. Union of India Ors. dated 27th October, 2020 in Writ Petition No. 871 of 2020 wherein rejection of petitioners declaration communicated under Sabka Vishwas Scheme, 2019 had been set aside. Petitioner also refers to a decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate. 21. The situation emerges there is no dispute on that petitioner is eligible person to claim benefit of Sabka Vishwas scheme and had accordingly had made a declaration in Form SVLDRS-1, as provided. The same was responded to by issuing SVLDRS-2 by the designated committee. While the estimate under SVLDRS-2 exceeded the amount declared by the petitioner, it will entail an opportunity to petitioner on its disagreement over the estimated amount before issuing statement SVLDRS-3 indicating the amount payable by the declarant. The scheme also provides for an accommodation of adjournment for hearing. Statement with regard to amount payable has been issued in Form SVLDRS-3 on 19th February, 2020. It is the case of the petitioner that communications are required to be made either on email id or via SMS on registered mobile/phone. While petitioner asserts the same, there is no definitive response on the same. It does not appear to be certain that communications had ever been issued to petitioner on email id or via SMS on the registered mobile/phone. It may have to be referred to that there is no specific record made available about the same. 22. It would be pertinent to ref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... parties should be in adherence to the principles of natural justice. This was a case in respect of SVLDRS. 25. In case of Chaque Jour HR Services Vs. Union of India 2020 (372) E.L.T. 522 (Del.), Delhi High Court, while application under SVLDRS had been rejected by the authority on the premise that the disputed amount was not quantified and communicated prior to 30.6.2019 finding that the impugned order has been passed without hearing petitioner had set aside the impugned order and the matter was remanded to competent authority to hear the petitioner before passing order. 26. Having regard to foregoing discussion and decisions, we deem it appropriate that petitioner may have an opportunity of hearing. We therefore, consider it appropriate to set aside the impugned statement SVLDRS-3 dated 19th February, 2020. 27. In the result, impugned declaration in the form of SVLDRS-3 issued by respondent No. 4 on 19th February, 2020 is set aside restoring the proceedings before the authority. The concerned authority to give an opportunity of hearing to petitioner and decide the matter petitioner pursuant to Sabka Vishwas scheme. 28. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
