M/S Bharat Sanchar Nigam LTD. vs. The Union Of INDIA And 3 Ors

Held

The Court set aside the impugned rejection of the petitioner's declaration (referred to as Annexure-I, dated 30.12.2019, though the date of rejection is not explicitly stated as 30.12.2019). The matter was remanded back to the authorities to reconsider the application/declaration furnished by the petitioner (ARN No. LD3012190002498) and pass appropriate orders thereon in terms of the scheme and the rules. The Court further directed that if the authorities required a fresh declaration, they should permit the petitioner to file one. The respondents were directed to pass the required orders on the declaration/application within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. The Court agreed with the submission made by the learned ASGI that the writ petition could be disposed of in terms of the order passed in a similar case, WP(C) No. 2149/2020. The ratio decidendi is that in cases of discrepancies in legacy dispute resolution scheme declarations, especially concerning penalty amounts, and where a formal rejection order is not provided, the matter should be remanded for reconsideration, allowing for correction or refiling of declarations, to uphold the objective of the scheme.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (BSNL), was an assessee under Chapter-V of the Finance Act, 1994. A Show Cause Notice was issued on March 19, 2012, demanding Rs. 1,78,17,401/- for the financial year 2008-09. The order-in-original dated March 12, 2013, confirmed a demand of Rs. 1,72,99,397/- along with interest, but dropped the penalty. BSNL filed an appeal against this order before the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. During the pendency of the appeal, the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 was introduced. BSNL filed a declaration under this scheme on December 30, 2019. The Designated Committee rejected the declaration with a remark that the amount of penalty indicated was incorrect, as the order-in-original showed Rs. 0.00 penalty, while BSNL had indicated Rs. 1,72,99,397.00 in the penalty column of its declaration.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Designated Committee was justified in rejecting the petitioner's declaration under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, based on an alleged incorrect entry of penalty amount in Form SVLDRS-1, thereby denying the benefit of the scheme? (Question of law and fact, concerning the interpretation and application of the Sabka Vishwas Scheme and its rules). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the authorities were obligated to issue Form SVLDRS-2 if they disagreed with the declaration, and subsequently Form SVLDRS-3. They submitted that the rejection remark on the portal was not a formal written order and that the scheme aimed to resolve legacy disputes. They relied on the spirit of the scheme to liquidate pending litigation. Revenue's contention: The respondent (Union of India and others) submitted that a co-ordinate bench of the High Court had dealt with a similar matter in WP(C) No. 2149/2020 (Assam Cricket Association –Vs- Union of India and Ors.). They proposed that this writ petition could also be disposed of in terms of the order passed in that case, which involved directing the petitioner to apply for correction of information in Form SVLDRS-I and for the authorities to pass a reasoned order.