Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, after the Tribunal remanded the excise matter for de novo adjudication, the declarants remained eligible under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, and whether their declaration ought to be accepted under the category of litigation, sub-category SCN involving duty pending.
Analysis: The remand order had the effect of reviving the dispute from the stage of original adjudication, so that the matter stood pending before the adjudicating authority and had not attained final hearing on or before 30.06.2019. The rejection of the declaration on the footing that the case fell under pending appeal or, alternatively, that it must be treated as arrears, was inconsistent with the legal effect of a remand and with the object of the scheme. Once the earlier adjudication was set aside and the matter was sent back for fresh decision, the declaration could not be denied on the premise that the dispute had already been finally heard.
Conclusion: The declaration was held to be maintainable under the litigation category and the respondents were directed to accept it and process it through the designated committee.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded, the rejection orders were quashed, and the petitioners were entitled to have their declaration considered under the scheme.
Ratio Decidendi: An order of remand restores the dispute to the stage of pending adjudication, and a declarant cannot be denied scheme eligibility on the basis that the matter had already been finally heard when fresh adjudication remains pending.