M/S Navbharat Engicon PVT. LTD. And Another vs. The Union Of INDIA And 2 Others

Held

The Court rejected relief (a) and (b), holding that the period for the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme-2019) had lapsed and the petitioners had not paid the settled amount. The Court found it beyond its powers to extend the time for payment under the scheme, as such an extension would amount to legislation. Therefore, these reliefs could not be granted. Regarding relief (c), the Court noted that the petitioners had admittedly filed an appeal before the appellate authority against the Order in Original dated March 26, 2021, which was pending. The Court also observed that the Order in Original was passed after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing, despite the petitioner's requests for extensions. Under these circumstances, the Court held that relief (c) could not be entertained as the appeal was pending before the appellate authority. The Court found no merit in the writ petition overall. Any observations made in the order were clarified as not being adverse to the petitioner in the decision of the pending appeal.

Facts

The petitioners, M/s Navbharat Engicon Pvt. Ltd. and another, filed a writ petition seeking several reliefs. Primarily, they sought a direction to deposit service tax as approved under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme-2019) and to prevent the recovery of tax, interest, and penalty determined by an Order in Original dated March 26, 2021. The petitioners had filed six SVLDRS-1 declarations but had not paid the settled amount under the scheme. The Order in Original was passed by the Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax, Ghaziabad, after the petitioner participated in adjudication proceedings but repeatedly sought extensions for filing written submissions. The petitioners admitted in their petition that an appeal against the Order in Original is pending before the appellate authority.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Court can direct the Respondent-Authorities to permit the Petitioners to deposit service tax under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme-2019) after the scheme's period has lapsed and the settled amount has not been paid, thereby extending the statutory period for payment? 2. Whether the Court can direct the Respondent-Authorities to consider the willingness of the Petitioners for the benefits of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme-2019) when the statutory period for payment has expired? 3. Whether the Court can entertain a prayer to restrain the recovery of tax, interest, and penalty determined by an Order in Original when an appeal against the said order is pending before the appellate authority? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioners argued for directions to deposit service tax under the SVLDR Scheme and to be granted its benefits. They also sought to prevent recovery based on the Order in Original. Respondent's Arguments: The respondents did not explicitly record arguments for all points, but their actions and the court's reasoning imply they contended that the SVLDR Scheme's period had lapsed and the court could not extend it legislatively. They also implicitly argued that the pending appeal against the Order in Original barred the writ court from entertaining the challenge to recovery.