M/S Kamaljeet Singh And Sons HUF vs. The Union Of INDIA And 3 Ors.

Held

The Court set aside the impugned rejection order dated 14.01.2020 (though the judgment refers to the date of the second declaration, the rejection order itself is not explicitly dated in the text). The matter was remanded back to the authorities to reconsider the application/declaration furnished by the petitioner vide ARN LD14012000001159 filed on 14.01.2020. The authorities were directed to pass appropriate orders in terms of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, and its rules. 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 order. The Court disposed of the writ petition in terms of its order in WP(C) No. 2122/2020 dated 08.06.2020, and also in terms of the order in WP(C) No. 2149/2020 dated 25.02.2020, which involved a similar remand.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Kamaljeet Singh and Sons HUF, received a show cause notice dated 07.11.2019 alleging evasion of service tax amounting to Rs. 1,55,61,642/- for the period 2013-14 to June 2017. The petitioner requested adjudication to enable application under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. An Order-in-Original dated 31.12.2019 confirmed the demand of Rs. 1,55,61,642/- along with interest and imposed penalties. The petitioner filed an initial declaration under the Scheme on 31.12.2019, but later realized the penalty amount was not declared. A second declaration was filed on 14.01.2020, correctly declaring the penalty. The first declaration was rejected for not including the penalty. The second declaration was subsequently rejected by the Designated Committee on the ground that an earlier application on the same issue had already been disposed of.

Key Issues

1. Whether the second declaration filed by the petitioner under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, vide ARN LD140200001159 dated 14.01.2020, is maintainable when an earlier declaration (ARN LD3112190022688 dated 31.12.2019) for the same issue was rejected. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the first declaration was incorrect as it failed to declare the penalty amount. The second declaration was filed to rectify this omission and correctly declare all amounts, including the penalty. They sought to have the second declaration accepted and processed. Revenue's contention: The revenue, through the learned ASGI, submitted that a coordinate bench of the High Court had disposed of a similar issue in WP(C) No. 2149/2020 by remanding the matter back to the authorities for fresh consideration. They proposed that the present writ petition could also be disposed of similarly.