Bombay High Court directs Designated Committee For Afresh Consideration of Declaration under SVLDR Scheme

Bombay High Court directs Designated Committee For Afresh Consideration of Declaration under SVLDR Scheme

The division bench comprising Justices Milind N. Jhadav and Ujjal Bhuyan of the Bombay High Court (HC) in the case of Sabareesh Pallikere, Proprietor of M/s Finbros Marketing (Petitioner) v. Jurisdictional Designated Committee (Respondents) gave directions to the Designated Committee for considering declaration afresh as a valid declaration under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (SVLDRS) and grant consequential relief

The HC Division Bench set aside the order and remanded the matter back to Designated Committee to consider the declaration of the petitioner afresh as a valid declaration in terms of the scheme under the category of investigation, inquiry, and audit and thereafter grant the consequential relief(s) to the petitioner.

The factual matrix of the case is that the petitioner claimed to be the sole proprietor of the proprietorship firm M/s Finbros Marketing which has its office at Thane (West). The petitioner has been engaged in the business of facilitating the distribution of personal loans in Mumbai and is associated with various banks and financial institutions.

The petitioner being a service provider was registered as such under Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994. In his statement, the petitioner admitted that the total service tax liability for the period under consideration was around Rs 1.93 crore, further stating that after initiation of inquiry; petitioner had paid service tax of Rs 18 lakh besides undertaking to discharge Rs 50 lakh and a further amount of Rs 32 lakh by December 2018.

The petitioner further stated that the remaining amount of service tax liability would be paid by March 2019 along with interest due.

The Central Government in the meanwhile introduced the scheme through the Finance Act 2019 for resolution of disputes relating to central excise and service tax which have since been subsumed in goods and services tax (GST).

The petitioner availed the opportunity for settlement under the said scheme he made a declaration in terms thereof under the category of inquiry, investigation or audit.

The petitioner filed a writ petition against the order of the Designated Committee wherein he sought before the HC to quash the order passed by the Committee that rejected the declaration of the petitioner filed under the Scheme 2019.

The petitioner further asked the HC to give a direction to the respondent for reconsidering the declaration of the petitioner in terms of the scheme and grant the reliefs to the petitioner.

While allowing the writ petition, the Court directed the designated committee to provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It further directed the committee to pass a speaking order that is to be communicated to the petitioner within eight weeks.