M/S Post Master vs Deputy Commissioner
2023 Latest Caselaw 81 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

                D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3350/2022

M/s Post Master
                                                                  ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
Deputy Commissioner
                                                                ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Javed Khan with
                               Mr. Palash Gupta &
                               Mr. Jaideep Malik
For Respondent(s)        :

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. PANKAJ MITHAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA

Order

03/01/2023

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner by the medium of this writ petition assails the

order in original dated 16.12.2021 passed by the Deputy

Commissioner Central Goods and Service Tax Division confirming

the demand of service tax of Rs.3,26,014/- with the same amount

of penalty.

The petitioner undoubtedly had a remedy of appeal under

Section 35 of the Excise Act read with the provisions of the

Finance Act to challenge the aforesaid order in original, but

instead of availing the remedy of appeal, the petitioner has

invoked the writ jurisdiction on the ground that the matter

involves a jurisdictional issue and, therefore, alternate remedy

would not be a bar to maintain this petition.

The submission is that the demand is beyond the period of

limitation and where the question of limitation arises, it becomes a

(2 of 2) [CW-3350/2022]

question of jurisdiction as has been held by series of judgments of

various High Courts as well as Hon'ble Supreme Court.

On merits it has been submitted that the petitioner has filed

an application under the "Sabka Viswas Legacy Dispute Resolution

Scheme (SVLDRS)" on 21.12.2019 and has declared the tax

liability voluntarily for the period 01.01.2015 to 30.06.2017.

Since the petitioner has voluntarily declared its liability for

the payment of service tax, it cannot be said that he had

suppressed any material facts and that the non-payment of the

service tax within the time stipulated from the date of such

voluntary declaration was for the reason that the country was

suffering from Covid-19 pandemic and that there were technical

glitches in deposit of the said tax online.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we direct

for the issuance of notice to the respondent by registered post,

returnable within six weeks.

List for admission/final disposal immediately thereafter.

Until further orders of this Court, the respondent shall not

take any coercive action against the petitioner for recovering the

interest amount and the penalty as per the order in original dated

16.12.2021 inasmuch as the service tax liability has already been

cleared by the petitioner.

                                   (SHUBHA MEHTA),J                                                   (PANKAJ MITHAL),CJ

                                   N.K. GANDHI/LAKSHYA SHARMA /2









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)