Case Law Details
Akshaya Aqua Farms Vs Designated Committee (Madras High Court)
The petitioner challenges order passed by the first respondent, the Designated Committee rejecting its application under the Sabka Viswas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme. The order is a one liner, which simply says ‘Dear Taxpayer, your SVLDRS Form for the ARN No LD1112190001929 has been rejected.’ No reasons have been set out as to why the petitioner’s application is found to be unsuitable for the purpose of the Scheme.
In counter, the defence taken is that investigation in the matter is still on-going and that the duty component has not been quantified. Reference in this regard is made to the definition of the term ‘quantified’ under Section 121(r) of the Scheme in terms of which a written communication intimating the duty demand would connote proper quantification for the purpose of the Scheme.
The ambit of the word ‘quantified’ however stands amplified by a subsequent circular issued by the Board bearing No.1071/4/2019-CX dated 27.08.2019.
In this case, a statement of the petitioner has been recorded at the time of investigation on 02.05.2017 indicating the duty amount payable. This fact reveals itself from the counter affidavit wherein at paragaraph 5 reference is made to statement recorded on 02.05.2017.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
