Page 64 - GSTL_27th August 2020_Vol 39_Part 4

390 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 39
7. The first appellate authority by its order dated 30-1-2018 upheld the
entire order in original and dismissed both the appeals.
8. The writ applicants being dissatisfied with the order passed by the
first appellate authority dismissing both the appeals preferred two separate ap-
peals before the appellate Tribunal. The two appeals filed before the Tribunal are
still pending as on date for final adjudication. The details of the pre-deposit
made by the writ applicant No. 1 company for the purpose of filing the two ap-
peals before the appellate Tribunal is as under :

Sr. No. Challan Nos. & Date Amount (Rs.)
1. 00021, dated 18-4-2018 100/-
2. 00022, dated 18-4-2018 7,673/-
3. 00023, dated 18-4-2018 34,453/-
4. 00024, dated 18-4-2018 26,828/-
Total 69,054/-

9. It appears that in the Union Budget for the Financial Year 2019-20
presented in the Parliament on 5th July, 2019, a Scheme for resolving pending
disputes with regard to the statutes like the Central Excise Act, the Service Tax
Laws, etc., (which stood repealed with effect from 1-7-2017 in view of GST Laws
having been brought into force) came to be introduced. This Scheme is known as
the “Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019”.
10. The main objective of the above referred Scheme is to liquidate the
legacy cases of the Central Excise and Service Tax that are subsumed in the GST
and are pending in litigation before the various forums. Under the Scheme, am-
nesty is allowed by offering an opportunity to the taxpayers to pay the outstand-
ing tax and get cleared of any other consequences under the law.
11. It appears from the materials on record that the writ applicants
herein thought fit to avail the benefit of the said Scheme referred to above and in
the process filed two separate declarations under Section 125 of the said Act read
with Rule 3 of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019
(hereinafter referred to as, “Rules”). The two declarations were made in Form
SVLDRS-1. The dispute cropped up from this stage onwards.
12. It appears that the application preferred by the writ applicants seek-
ing to avail the benefit of the Scheme was held to be not maintainable on the
premise that the case involves the confiscation of goods and imposition of re-
demption fine and Section 129 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019 does not grant any
relief from the confiscation or redemption fine.
13. In the aforesaid context, the writ applicants were called upon to ap-
pear for personal hearing on 26-12-2019 before the Additional Commissioner
CGST, Ahmedabad South vide letter dated 20-12-2019.
14. Mr. Dhaval Shah, the Learned Counsel appearing for the writ ap-
plicants, vehemently submitted that his clients were not able to appear before the
concerned authority on 7-5-2020 as at the relevant point of time there was a com-
plete lockdown on account of the COVID- 19 pandemic and the office of the writ
applicants was also closed. Mr. Dhaval Shah, submitted that even the office of
the concerned respondent before whom the hearing was to take place on 7-5-2020
was closed. Mr. Shah further pointed out that despite such a situation prevailing
at the relevant point of time the Principal Commissioner CGST, Ahmedabad

GST LAW TIMES  27th August 2020  64