Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Revenue authorities must accept co-noticee's application under Sabka Vishwas Scheme when main noticee's declaration accepted The Bombay HC allowed a petition challenging rejection of declarations under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. The revenue ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Revenue authorities must accept co-noticee's application under Sabka Vishwas Scheme when main noticee's declaration accepted
The Bombay HC allowed a petition challenging rejection of declarations under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. The revenue authorities had rejected applications citing bank guarantee basis and unquantified amounts. The court held that since the main noticee's declaration was accepted after amount quantification before June 30, 2019, the co-noticee was also entitled to scheme benefits. The court directed authorities to accept the co-noticee's application and communicate payment requirements within four weeks.
Issues: 1. Challenge to rejection of declarations under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019.
Analysis: 1. The petitioners challenged the rejection of 9 declarations made under the SVLDR Scheme. The rejection of the first declaration was based on the ground that the application cannot be filed on the basis of a bank guarantee and the amount was not quantified. The petitioners argued that this ground of rejection was erroneous as the issue of quantification on the basis of a bank guarantee did not apply to this declaration. The court found that the rejection was unjustified, and the respondents were directed to accept the declaration and communicate any required payment within a specified timeframe.
2. Six other declarations were also rejected on similar grounds related to the basis of rejection and quantification issues. The court held that the rejection was not valid as the issue was covered by a previous court decision. The respondents were directed to accept these declarations and communicate any payment required within a specified period, following which the petitioners were to make the payment and inform the respondents for the issuance of Form SVLDRS-4 certificates.
3. Another declaration made by one of the partners was rejected on the ground of duplicacy as the partner had initially filed with the wrong Commissionerate and later corrected the application. The court found the rejection ground invalid and directed the respondents to accept the declaration, communicate any required payment, and issue the necessary certificate upon payment.
4. The last declaration challenged was rejected due to the amount not being quantified before a specific date and an ongoing investigation. However, since the main noticee's declaration was accepted, the rejection of the co-noticee's declaration was deemed unjustified. The court directed the acceptance of the co-noticee's application, communication of any payment required, and issuance of the certificate upon payment.
5. The petition was allowed, and all declarations were directed to be accepted as per the court's detailed instructions. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
of 
TaxTMI 
