Clerical error in VCES-1 cannot defeat scheme benefit when substantive payment conditions are met.

A clerical mismatch in a VCES-1 declaration could not justify denial of statutory scheme relief where the accompanying calculation sheet showed the correct tax dues and payment of 50% of the balance amount. Because the substantive payment requirement had been met, the error in stating the total dues was treated as a venial mistake, and the rejection of the declaration was not justified. The application was set aside, and the declarant was held entitled to the scheme benefit and consequential relief in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of the VCES-1 declaration for alleged short payment of 50% of the declared tax dues was justified when the discrepancy arose from a clerical error in the form.

Analysis: The declaration was supported by the accompanying calculation sheet, which showed the correct tax dues and the payment of 50% of the balance amount. The mismatch in the VCES-1 form was only a clerical mistake in stating the total tax dues. Such a venial error could not justify denial of the statutory scheme benefit when the substantive requirement of payment had been met.

Conclusion: The rejection of the VCES-1 application was not justified and was set aside. The appellant was held entitled to the benefit of the scheme and consequential relief in accordance with law.

---