The Bombay High Court directed the Designated Committee to consider the Declaration as a valid declaration under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (SVLDRS).
The Petitioner, Elaf Tours and Travels was stated to be an unregistered partnership firm comprising the partners. The Petitioner carries on the business of Haj and Umrah tours/journeys to Saudi Arabia and has been facilitating Haj pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia for many years.
The Show cause cum demand notice was issued to petitioner by the Deputy Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST) and Central Excise, Palghar alleging amongst others that petitioner had failed to pay service tax amount of Rs.19,21,465 for the period from 2013-14 to 2017-18.
The show-cause cum demand notice culminated in an order in original passed by the Assistant Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise. After the personal hearing petitioner filed a written submission.
By the order in original, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of service tax amounting to Rs.19,21,465 besides ordering payment of interest and imposition of penalty.
In the meanwhile, Central Government introduced the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 as part of the Finance Act, 2019 to bring an end to pending litigations under the earlier indirect tax regime which now stood subsumed under the Goods and Services Tax (GST). The scheme was made effective from 1st September, 2019.
The division bench of Justice Abhay Ahuja and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan highlighted that the primary focus of the scheme is to unlock the baggage of pending litigations from the pre-GST regime so that business can move on and the administrative machinery can also fully focus on the smooth implementation of GST.
The Court clarified that this is the broad picture that the officials should have in mind while considering a declaration seeking amnesty under the scheme; the approach should be to ensure that the scheme is successful and therefore a liberal view embedded with the principles of natural justice is called for.
Therefore, the court held that the rejection of the declaration of the petitioner by the Designated Committee is not justified. Accordingly the same is hereby set aside and quashed.
The court remanded the matter back to the Designated Committee to consider the declaration of the petitioner as a valid declaration and thereafter grant consequential relief in terms of the scheme after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, who shall be informed about the date, time, and place of the hearing.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
