TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 435X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igh Court. The respondents were not justified in rejecting the petitioners' application without giving them an opportunity - Petition allowed. - W.P. No.3130/2021 and W.P. No.3133/2021 - - - Dated:- 5-10-2021 - HON BLE JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND HON BLE JUSTICE ANIL VERMA Name of counsels for parties Shri R.S Rau Choudhary with Shri Chiman Lal Dangi, learned counsels for the petitioners. Shri V.N Dube, learned counsel for the respondents. Judgment delivered by Sujoy Paul, J. In these petitions, the petitioners have assailed the communication of respondents whereby the petitioners' applications preferred under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (hereinafter referred as 'Scheme') were rejected by respondents on 18.12.2019. At the outset, learned counsel for the parties urged that both the matters contains similar questions and therefore, the matters may be analogously heard. 2. On the joint request of the parties, the matters were analogously heard and decided by this common order. 3. Facts are taken from WP No.3133/2021. The relevant facts as pleaded are that the petitioner a propriety firm decided to take b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 7 of the Right to Information Act, 2005. 7. In turn, respondent no.5 by letter dated 25.11.2020 Annexure P/5 informed the petitioners that the office of Assistant Commissioner, CGST and Central Taxes, Division V, Indore were entrusted only with the work of verification of information mentioned by the tax payers in their SVLDRS-1 application with regard to the show cause notice/order in original/order in appeal or its pendency at CESTAT or at the High Court. Alongwith letter of respondent no.5, certain documents were furnished to the petitioners. Upon perusal of those documents, it became clear that the respondent no.5 accepted that the tax not paid falls under Arrears category. Reliance is placed on Annexur R/5. 8. It is urged that the declaration filed by the petitioners were found to be correct because no objection was raised by the respondent no.5 while forwarding the case to the designated committee. The rejection of application SVLDRS-1 of the petitioners is reflected in the portal with a remark Incorrect application by designated committee is arbitrary and illegal. 9. Shri R.S Roy Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on sub-rule-1 and sub-r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the following judgments :- Seventh Plane Networks Pvt. Ltd Vs. Union of India reported in 2020 (41) GSTL 165 (Del), Vaishali Sharma Vs. Union of India reported in 2020 (40) GSTL 441 (Del), Though Blurb Vs. Union of India reported in 2020(43) GSTL 449 (Bom), Integrated Project Logistics Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Union of India reported in 2021 (51) GSTL 3 (Del), Union of India Vs. Umesh Dhaimode reported in 1998 (98) ELT 584(SC), Shiv Kishor Construction Pvt. Ltd Vs. Union of India reported in 2020 (40) GSTL 443 (Pat), Thoppil Agencies Vs. Ast. Commr. Of Commercial Taxes Hubballi reported in 2020 (41) GSTL 30 (Kar), Industrial Personnel And Security Services Pvt. Ltd Vs. Commrr. Of CGST, Delhi South reported in 2020 (373) ELT 44(Del), G.R Palle Electricals Vs. Union of India reported in 2021 (45) GSTL 10 (Bom), Elaf Tours and Travells Vs. Union of India reported in 2021 (47) GSTL 237 (Bom), Indian Machine Tool Manfrs. Association Vs. Union of India reported in 2021(45) GSTL 28 (Kar), M/s Hitech Projects Pvt. Ltd Vs Union of India (Special Civil Application NO.7292/2020 decided on 06.07.2020) reported in 2020 (39) GSTL 388 (Guj), Nagen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d above. 17. We have bestowed our anxious consideration on rival contentions and perused the record. 18. At the outset, it is relevant to note that the mistake committed by the petitioners is not termed by the respondents as malicious or deliberately committed by them with any ulterior motive. Thus, twin questions need our consideration. Firstly, whether in a situation like this principles of natural justice are to be followed and secondly, whether the petitioners can be left remedy-less when this kind of mistake takes place ? 19. The applicability of principles of natural justice were considered by the Bombay High Court in the case of Thought Blurb (supra). The principle laid down in Thought Blurb (supra) was followed in the case of G.R. Palle Electricals and Elaf Tours Travels (supra). It is apposite to quote relevant para from the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of G.R. Palle Electricals (supra) which reads as under:- 22. Under sub section (1) of section 127, where an amount estimated to be payable by the declarant, as estimated by the Designated Committee, equals the amount declared by the declarant, then the Designated Committee shall issue a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er investigation and audit where the duty involved is quantified and communicated to the party or admitted by him in a statement on or before 30.06.2019. * * * * * 26.1. It means that in a case which is pending under investigation and audit and where the duty involved is quantified and communicated to the declarant or admitted by the declarant in a statement on or before 30.06.2019, the relief available would be 70% of the duty involved if it is ₹ 50 lakhs or less and 50% if it is more than ₹ 50 lakhs. 26.2. Likewise, clause (g) of paragraph 10 is relevant and the same is extracted hereunder :- 10. Further, the following issues are clarified in the context of the various provisions of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2019 and Rules made thereunder: * * * * * * (g) Cases under an enquiry, investigation or audit where the duty demand has been quantified on or before the 30th day of June, 2019 are eligible under the Scheme. Section 2(r) defines quantified as a written communication of the amount of duty payable under the indirect tax enactment. It is clarified that such written communication will include a letter intimating duty demand; or duty lia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... munication will include a letter intimating duty demand; or duty liability admitted by the person during enquiry, investigation or audit; or audit report etc. Q 45. With respect to cases under enquiry, investigation or audit what is meant by 'written communication' quantifying demand ? Ans. Written communication will include a letter intimating duty/tax demand or duty/tax liability admitted by the person during enquiry, investigation or audit or audit report etc. 29. This aspect of the matter was gone into in considerable detail by us in Thought Blurb Vs. Union of India, decided on 27.10.2020, whereafter in the facts of that case it was held as under :- 49 Reverting back to the facts of the present case, we find that on the one hand there is a letter of respondent No.3 to the petitioner quantifying the service tax liability for the period 1st April, 2016 to 31st March, 2017 at ₹ 47,44,937.00 which quantification is before the cut off date of 30 th June, 2019 and on the other hand for the second period i.e. from 1 st April, 2017 to 30th June, 2017 there is a letter dated 18th June, 2019 of the petitioner addressed to respondent No.3 admitting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... violation of the principles of natural justice. Rejection of application (declaration) will lead to adverse civil consequences for the declarant as he would have to face the consequences of enquiry or investigation or audit. As has been held by us in Capgemini Technology Services India Limited (supra) it is axiomatic that when a person is visited by adverse civil consequences, principles of natural justice like notice and hearing would have to be complied with. Non-compliance to the principles of natural justice would impeach the decision making process rendering the decision invalid in law. 31. As has been held by us in Thought Blurb (supra), the scheme is a beneficial one with the prime object of unloading the baggage of pending litigations centering around service tax and excise duty. The focus is to unload this baggage of pre-GST regime and thereby allowing business to move ahead but at the same time to also ensure that the administrative machinery can focus fully in the smooth implementation of GST. This is the broad picture which should be kept in mind while considering a declaration seeking amnesty under the scheme. Therefore, a liberal view embedded with the principl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
