TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (7) TMI 780
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ner. 2. In support of the aforementioned prayer, the facts leading to filing of the writ petitions are the petitioner is a private limited company and engaged in design, sales, installation, preventive and corrective maintenance of airconditioning systems. It was registered under the provisions of Chapter V, Finance Act, 1994 for the purposes of Service Tax. For the period April 2016 -September 2016; September 2016 - March 2017; and April 2017 - June 2017 alleged to have filed manual returns on 5.6.2019 on account of non -availability of online access. In the meantime the respondent came out with the Scheme 'Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 which enables taxpayers to settle their arrears/dues of duties under the Central Excise and Service Tax regimes. 3. The petitioner opted under the scheme and filed three declarations in Form SVLDRS-1 on 31.12.2019 as evidenced from Exts.P5, P6 and P7. In response thereof, the 3rd respondent / Designated Committee -II consisting of Joint Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner, while accepting the declarations made by the petitioner issued statements estimating the amount payable in Form SVLDRS-3 dated 28.2.2020 Ex....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ling of ST3 returns with effect from 1.10.2011 as per the Departmental Notification No.43/2011-ST dated 25.8.2011. The alleged returns Exts.P1 to P3 claimed to have been filed manually were not filed by the petitioner at all and the full tax required to have been paid as declared in Ext.P5 was false as discovered and confirmed from the records. Requests from departmental officials to produce details of alleged payment of full tax amounts, if any, were also not ignored. There is nothing to show that the same were filed or the alleged payments were made. There is not even a whisper of any substantiating evidence for alleged manual filing of such important documents. On perusal of the petitioner's SVLDRS-1 declarations contained willful mis declarations for the purpose of fraudulently availing the better benefits than what the petitioner would have been entitled and thus defeating the larger Government's / public interest. Keeping in view the objects of the scheme, issued Rectified electronic Exts.P12 to 14 SVLDR Form 3 purportedly under Section 128 of the Act. Even the petitioner has opted not to avail the Personal Hearing. The Hon'ble Apex Court, by its various judgments....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... but has not paid it; (g) who have filed an application in the Settlement Commission for settlement of a case; (h) persons seeking to make declarations with respect to excisable goods set forth in the Fourth Schedule to the Central Excise Act, 1944. (2) A declaration under sub-section (1)shall be made in such electronic form as may be prescribed. 126. (1) The designated committee shall verify the correctness of the declaration made by the declarant under section 125 in such manner as may be prescribed: Provided that no such verification shall be made in case where a voluntary disclosure of an amount of duty has been made by the declarant. (2) The composition and functioning of the designated committee shall be such as may be prescribed. 127. (1) Where the amount estimated to be payable by the declarant, as estimated by the designated committee, equals the amount declared by the declarant, then, the designated committee shall issue in electronic form, a statement, indicating the amount payable by the declarant, within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt of the said declaration. (2) Where the amount estimated ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and production of proof. 128. Within thirty days of the date of issue of a statement indicating the amount payable by the declarant, the designated committee may modify its order only to correct an arithmetical error or clerical error, which is apparent on the face of record, on such error being pointed out by the declarant or suo motu, by the designated committee. 7. A complete procedure and eligibility has been prescribed for availing the benefit of the scheme. However, as per Section 128 within 30 days of issuance of statement, designated committee, suo motu, is empowered to correct an arithmetical and clerical error, which is apparent on the face of record. No doubt in the instant case while accepting the declarations submitted by the petitioner issued statements vide Exts.P8, P9 and P10 dated 28th February 2020. The rectification orders Exts.P12 to P14 dated 2.6.2020 are beyond 30 days. Though Petitioner was entitled to the benefit of the scheme as per originally issued SVLDRS-3 but, this Court cannot remain oblivious that many assesses availed the benefits of scheme and owing to such fact, the designated committee could not notice the manual returns Exts.P1 to P3....