Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the designated committee had jurisdiction to reject a declaration under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 after issuing Form SVLDRS-3 and after payment of the quantified amount, and whether the impugned order was therefore liable to be quashed.
Analysis: The scheme under Chapter V of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019 permits verification of the declaration, issuance of a statement quantifying the amount payable, payment within the prescribed time, and thereafter issuance of a discharge certificate. The statutory power to modify the statement is narrowly confined to correction of arithmetical or clerical errors apparent on the face of the record under Section 128 and Rule 6(6) of the Scheme Rules. Once the designated committee had accepted the declaration, quantified the liability, and the amount was paid, it could not reopen the matter on merits or reject the declaration. The scheme does not contemplate a post-quantification rejection of an accepted declaration, and the impugned order was also passed without prior notice.
Conclusion: The designated committee lacked jurisdiction to issue the impugned rejection order after issuing Form SVLDRS-3 and receiving payment. The order was quashed and a discharge certificate was directed to be issued.