The court held that technicalities should not impede the purpose of the Sabka Vishwas Scheme, highlighting that prior payments should be duly credited.

ORDER

The writ petition is filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned statement in Form SVLDRS-3, dated 27.12.2019, issued by the first respondent, to quash the same, and consequently to direct the first respondent to consider the declaration filed by the petitioner by taking into account the deposits made by them between March and July 2008, in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Circulars issued by the Department under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution)

Scheme, 2019.

2. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material records, it is the case of the petitioner that a demand of duty to the tune of Rs.2,22,93,244/- was raised vide show cause notice dated 21.05.2007.

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached the Settlement Commission.

3. The Settlement Commission, by order dated 08.02.2008, recorded that the petitioner had already paid a sum of Rs.1,83,91,666/- and determined the balance duty payable at Rs.39,01,578/-. According to the petitioner, a sum of Rs.38,84,280/- was subsequently paid in various instalments, leaving a balance of only Rs.17,298/-.

4. The petitioner had also challenged the order of the Settlement Commission by filing W.P.No.7465 of 2008, which came to be dismissed on

20.07.2018, thereby, confirming the duty liability of Rs.2,22,93,244/-.

5. In the above circumstances, upon the introduction of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, the petitioner submitted a declaration in Form SVLDRS-1 on 28.10.2019. According to the petitioner, under the scheme, upon payment of 60% of the tax dues, the balance amount, along with interest and penalty, would be waived. However, on 28.11.2019, the second respondent issued Form SVLDRS-2, being an estimate under Section 127 of the Finance Act, 2019, with revised computations. In the said estimate, a sum of Rs.39,01,578/- was shown as the basic duty payable, and the petitioner was called upon to pay a revised amount of Rs.15,60,631/-, after granting tax relief of Rs.23,04,947/-.

6. According to the petitioner, the authorities failed to take into account the payments amounting to Rs.38,84,280/- made in various installments, and the dues were computed without giving credit to the same. It is the contention of the petitioner that, if such payments were duly considered, no amount would remain payable, and the petitioner would be entitled to the full benefit under the scheme.

In these circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court.

7. The writ petition is resisted by the respondents by filing a counter affidavit. It is necessary to extract the contention of the respondents as set out in Paragraph No.4 of the counter affidavit, which reads as follows:-

''4. With reference to the petitioner's averments in Para 4, 5, 6 and

7 of the affidavit, it is submitted that SVLDRS Scheme requires a declarant to make a true declaration by stating facts correctly. As per the SVLDRS scheme, the designated Committee is mandated to verify official records to verify the facts declared by the declarant and if the facts are different than what was declared by the Declarant, then a statement in form SVLDRS -2 to be issued indicating the estimated amount payable as per official records and by offering a personal hearing to the declarant whether he agrees with the amount specified by the Designated Committee. In the instant case, the petitioner filed Declaration ARN No.LD2810190000148 under the SVLDRS Scheme under category - "Arrears" with sub-category "Appeal not filed or appeal having attained finality" and inter