Case Law Details
Airlink Communication Pvt Ltd Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court)
Mr. Ankit Shah, learned counsel for the respondent – Department has only submitted that according to the instructions received and as stated in the affidavit in reply since the subsequent quantification which the Department treats as final qualification being later in point of time to the cut off date, the Department was not in a position to entertain the application and as such it had rejected the application.
We are not inclined to accept the submission of Shri Shah and the view of the Department. The quantification communication on 20.05.2019 was a final quantification according to the Department. If the Department had committed an error and it is corrected subsequently, then such quantification or the revised figure should relate back to the original quantification and it would only be substituting the figures and nothing more. The mistake committed by the Department was also an apparent mistake and a glaring mistake that they included the taxable services subsequent to the period of investigation and because of the said reason, a huge amount of liability had been raised. Depriving the petitioners for the fault of the Department, would be unfair and unreasonable.
We, therefore, hold that the quantification communicated on 27.12.2019 to be a quantification substituting the figures in the communication dated 20.05.2019 thus the quantification being prior to 30.06.2019. The reason for rejecting / not entertaining the application of the petitioners under the Scheme deserves to be set aside.
The application of the petitioners under the Scheme deserves to be treated as within time and should be processed accordingly.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
