The Government Of INDIA vs. Sikkandar. P

Held

The Court noted that the learned counsel appearing for the appellants (Revenue) had circulated a letter dated 23.04.2021, praying for the withdrawal of the Writ Appeal. In light of this request, the Court dismissed the Writ Appeal as withdrawn. No costs were awarded. The Court did not delve into the merits of the issues raised in the original writ petition or the grounds of appeal. The operative direction was solely to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn. No other issues were expressly left undecided as the appeal was disposed of on the procedural ground of withdrawal.

Facts

This matter is a Writ Appeal filed by the Government of India and the Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise against an order of the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court in W.P.(MD) No.19314 of 2020. The original writ petition was filed by P. Sikkandar, seeking a Mandamus to extend the provisions of Sections 6 and 7 of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, to the Finance (No.2) Act, 2019, specifically concerning the Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme (SVLDRS), 2019. The petitioner sought to pay the estimated amount determined by the designated committee by a specified date and requested the application of the SVLDRS (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2020, to Tamil Nadu to maintain parity with other states affected by COVID-19. The appellants (Revenue) have now circulated a letter praying for the withdrawal of this Writ Appeal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the provisions of Sections 6 and 7 of the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, should be extended to the Finance (No.2) Act, 2019, concerning the Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme (SVLDRS), 2019, to allow the petitioner to pay the estimated amount by a later date? 2. Whether the SVLDRS (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2020, should be applied to the State of Tamil Nadu to ensure parity among states affected by COVID-19, enabling the petitioner to pay the estimated amount or file a fresh application within extended timelines? Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner argued for the extension of the aforementioned provisions and the application of the Removal of Difficulties Order to enable them to comply with the SVLDRS, 2019, deadlines, citing the impact of COVID-19 and the need for equitable treatment across states. The petitioner sought directions for payment of the estimated amount by 31.12.2020 or filing a fresh application by the same date, with the estimated amount payable by 28.02.2021. Revenue's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the appellants (Revenue) in response to the writ petition or during the appeal proceedings, other than their subsequent request for withdrawal.