Tax dues quantification under Sabka Vishwas Scheme upheld: voluntary admitted amounts treated as "quantified", committee rejection unlawful

Whether tax dues were "quantified" for purposes of the Sabka Vishwas (SVLDRS) Scheme when the taxpayer had voluntarily disclosed and the Department had accepted a specific quantification prior to a later show-cause notice. Court held that Section 121(r) and the Scheme's statutory scheme treat admitted quantifications as "quantified" even if formal departmental completion of investigation or issuance of a show-cause notice occurs later; the Scheme expressly covers cases with pending enquiry/investigation. Reliance on precedent (Hans Uttam) affirmed. Consequence: the Designated Committee's rejection for non-quantification was unlawful and the petitioner's declaration was upheld.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the tax dues were quantified for the purposes of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019.
2. Whether the rejection of the petitioner's application under the Scheme was justified.

Summary:

1. Quantification of Tax Dues:
The primary issue was whether the 'tax dues' were quantified for the purposes of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. The petitioner claimed that there was no controversy regarding the amount of tax dues, which were quantified and communicated to the authorities. The petitioner had paid the duty, interest, and penalty, but the respondents did not accept the same on the grounds that the payments were made under the GST Registration Number of a different unit.

2. Rejection of Application:
The Designated Committee rejected the petitioner's application under the Scheme, stating that the demand was not finally quantified nor communicated to the party on or before 30.06.2019. The respondents contended that since investigations continued beyond 04.06.2019 and a show cause notice was issued on 09.08.2019, the tax dues were not quantified before the stipulated date.

Detailed Judgment:

Quantification of Tax Dues:
The court examined the context and noted that the petitioner had provided all necessary details and had communicated the quantification of tax dues to the authorities. The court emphasized that the Scheme covers cases where investigations, enquiries, and audits are pending and that the tax dues quantified in any communication from the taxpayer would qualify as 'tax dues' if there is no dispute regarding the same. The court referred to the definition of 'quantified' under Section 121(r) of the Act, which means a written communication of the amount of duty payable under the indirect tax enactment.

Rejection of Application:
The court found that the respondents had accepted the quantification of the excise duty as disclosed by the petitioner and had proceeded on that basis. The court concluded that the contention that tax dues would be quantified only on the culmination of investigation and issuance of a show cause notice was unmerited. The court held that the quantification of tax dues was ascertainable from the written communication on record and that the petitioner had discharged its entire liability as required under the Scheme.

Conclusion:
The court allowed the petition, rejecting the impugned decision of the Designated Committee and directed the respondents to issue the Discharge Certificate as contemplated under the Scheme within four weeks. The court emphasized that there was no dispute regarding the amount of tax paid by the petitioner and that the petitioner had fulfilled its obligations under the Scheme. The parties were left to bear their own costs.

---