M/S. Cozy Tour And Travels vs. The Union Of INDIA And 3 Ors.

Held

The Court held that both impugned orders dated 06.12.2019 and 29.02.2020, which rejected the petitioner's declarations under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, were to be set aside. The matter was remanded back to the respondent authorities to reconsider the petitioner's second application/declaration (ARN LD 3112190021021) filed on 31.12.2019. The Court directed the authorities to pass appropriate orders in terms of the scheme and its rules. Crucially, if the authorities deemed it necessary, they were to permit the petitioner to file a fresh declaration. The respondents were directed to pass the required orders within two months of receiving a certified copy of the Court's order. The ratio decidendi is that genuine errors in declarations under dispute resolution schemes should be allowed to be rectified, especially when the scheme aims to resolve legacy disputes, and a rigid application of 'single filing' rules can defeat the scheme's purpose if it prevents correction of bona fide mistakes.

Facts

The petitioner, M/S. Cozy Tour and Travels, was subjected to a demand of service tax, interest, and penalty by an order dated 23.09.2014. An appeal was filed before the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. During the pendency of the appeal, the petitioner applied under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. The petitioner filed an initial application (ARN LD 0612190001422) on 06.12.2019, but later discovered a calculation error regarding the pre-deposit amount. A rectified application (ARN LD 3112190021021) was filed on 31.12.2019. The respondent authorities rejected the first declaration by an order dated 06.12.2019 on grounds of 'Incorrect Declaration' and subsequently rejected the second declaration by an order dated 29.02.2020, stating that an SVLDRS-1 can only be filed once per case and the earlier one was disposed of.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondent authorities were justified in rejecting the petitioner's second declaration under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, on the ground that a prior declaration for the same case had already been disposed of, despite the petitioner seeking to rectify a calculation error in the initial declaration? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the rejection of their second application was erroneous, as it was filed to correct a genuine calculation mistake in the pre-deposit amount of the first application. They sought to avail the benefits of the scheme by rectifying the declaration. Revenue's Contention: The respondent authorities contended that the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, Rule 5, only permits a single declaration per case/order, and since the first declaration was already processed and disposed of, a second one for the same case was not permissible. They relied on the principle that a scheme once disposed of cannot be reopened through a subsequent application.