ORDER :

HARSHA DEVANI, J.

1. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Designated Committee made under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as the “Scheme") rejecting the declarations made by the petitioners, the petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court under article 226 of the Constitution of India.

2. The petitioners, against whom orders-in-original have been made by the adjudicating authority confirming demand of duty, ordering recovery of interest, imposing penalty and ordering confiscation of goods and imposing fine in lieu of confiscation, against which appeals are pending before the appellate forum, submitted requisite declarations under the Scheme. Separate notices were served upon the petitioners by the Designated Committee calling upon them to show cause as to why the declarations should not be treated as void as the Scheme permits waiver of duty, interest and penalty, but not fine in lieu of confiscation.

3. After hearing the petitioners, the Designated Committee has held that the cases involving confiscation and redemption fine have not been covered under the Scheme and, therefore, the declarations cannot be accepted and no relief can be granted to the petitioners under the Scheme.

4. Mr. Paresh Dave, learned advocate for the petitioners submitted that the dispute involved in this case is, whether or not, waiver from payment of redemption fine is allowed under the Scheme. It was submitted that the Designated Committee has rejected the declarations made by the petitioners on the ground that no relief as regards confiscation and redemption fine has been allowed under the Scheme, and, therefore, the entire matter covered under the declarations cannot be accepted. It was submitted that the petitioners’ submission has been that waiver of redemption fine is also allowed, and various FAQs, press releases and flyers published by the Government are relied upon in support of this submission. It was submitted that in the affidavit-in-reply by the Principal Commissioner, the stand adopted is that the Government has not granted any relief or immunity from confiscation and/or redemption fine under section 129 of the Finance Act, 2019 and that such relief or immunity is not covered under the Scheme. However, now by the letter dated 20th December, 2019 issued by the Ministry of Finance, a new case has been made out that waiver of fine was allowed under the Scheme but it was “fine” under section 9 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and not redemption fine under section 34 of the Act. It was submitted that, therefore, it is now accepted by the respondents that waiver of fine is also allowed under the Scheme, though fine is not specifically referred to under section 129 thereof. It was submitted that in view of the stand taken by the Government and the clarification issued, two issues arise :

(i) whether the Scheme would apply to a case involving “tax dues” and also confiscation/redemption fine; and if yes, what relief can be granted in such cases; and

(ii) when waiver of “fine” is allowed under the Scheme, whether that fine is “redemption fine” or “fine” levied by the court of law under section 9 of the Central Excise Act?

4.1 In respect of the first issue, it was submitted that the scheme would apply even in cases where confiscation and redemption fine are involved, because cases of redemption fine are not excluded from the Scheme. Reference was made to section 121(h) of the Finance Act which defines “declarant”, to mean a person who is eligible to make a declaration and files such declaration under section 125. It was pointed out that section 125 of the Finance Act allows “all persons” to make a declaration except those covered under clauses (a) to (h) thereof and that there is no exclusion for cases involving confiscation and redemption fine.

4.2 It was further submitted that section 123 of the Finance Act defines “tax dues” to mean the total amount of duty being disputed i