TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 343
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nushree Narain, Advocates for respondent No.4. J U D G M E N T MANMOHAN, J: (Oral) 1. The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing. 2. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the rejection order dated 17th January, 2020 whereby the declaration filed by the petitioner under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (for short "SVLDRS, 2019") has been rejected on the ground that the audit was conducted and conveyed on 02nd July, 2019 and amount of duty involved in the audit had not been quantified on or before the 30th day of June, 2019. 3. Mr. Nikhil Gupta, learned counsel for petitioner states that though the respondent No.4 issued audit memo in writing on 02nd July, 2019, yet the petitioner ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....019 and Rules made there-under, as follows: xxx xxx xxx (v) For the purpose of eligibility under the Scheme in some of the categories such as litigation, audit/enquiry/investigation etc., the relevant date is 30-6-2019. However, it may so happen that the facts of a case may change subsequently. For instance, in a case under audit/ investigation/enquiry where the tax dues have been quantified on or before 30.6.2019, a show cause notice is issued after 30-6-2019. Similarly, a case, which was under appeal as on 30-6-2019, may attain finality in view of appeal period being over etc. It is clarified that the eligibility with respect to a category in such cases shall be as it was on the relevant date i.e., 30-6-2019." B....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eclaration under the SVLDRS, 2019. The relevant portion of the FAQs is reproduced hereinbelow:- "Q.53. The amount quantified under an enquiry, investigation or audit on or before 30.06.2019 gets modified subsequently due to any reason. Will I still be eligible to file a declaration under the Scheme? Ans. Only such cases of enquiry, investigation or audit are covered under the Scheme where the duty/tax demand has been finally worked out on or before 30.06.2019. In other words, all the evidence/document gathering process is over and the tax liability has been worked out on or before 30.06.2019. For instance, a Draft Audit Report or the Final Audit Report has been issued on or before 30.06.2019. Similarly, a letter intimating....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....igation or audit has not been quantified on or before the 30th day of June, 2019;" 9. They emphatically deny that all demands were quantified and communicated to the petitioner on 28th June, 2020. They state that only one audit memo dated 02nd July, 2019 was issued to the petitioner i.e. after the cut-off date of 30th June, 2019. They emphasise that even the petitioner had mentioned the date of communication as 02nd July, 2019 in his declaration filed on 26th December, 2019 in the Form SVLRDS-1 under the SVLDRS, 2019. 10. Mr. Amit Bansal and Ms. Sonu Bhatnagar state that an opportunity of hearing can only be granted if the conditions laid down under Section 127 of the Finance Act, 2019 are fulfilled. They submit that there is no provi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....001) 247 ITR 128 (SC), it has been held that circulars are binding on departments and department cannot challenge them even if they are inconsistent with the statute. 13. This Court also finds that the audit in the present case was concluded on 28th June, 2019 and the amount due and payable was not only determined as well as communicated by the respondents to the petitioner but was also admitted by the petitioner. The relevant portion of the Audit Memo dated 2nd July, 2019 is reproduced hereinbelow:- "Point No.4: Wrong availement of CENVAT Credit: ........Therefore, the CENVAT Credit pertaining to input services used in providing these particular services was not available to the assessee in terms of Rule 2(1), 2(P), 3 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that had been quantified by the respondents and admitted on 28th June, 2019. 17. Keeping in view the aforesaid admitted facts, this Court is of the view that the duty liability stood admitted in an oral statement by the petitioner before 30th June, 2019 and consequently stood quantified prior to the cut-off date in accordance with the beneficial circulars dated 12th December, 2019 and 27th August, 2019 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs. 18. This Court is further of the opinion that a liberal interpretation has to be given to the SVLDRS, 2019 and the circulars issued by Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs as their intent is to unload the baggage relating to legacy disputes under the Central Excise and S....