Court quashes Form SVLDRS-3, directs fresh hearing, allows late payments. Applicants must appear.

The court quashed the impugned communication in Form SVLDRS-3 and remitted the matter to the Designated Committee for a fresh hearing. The respondents were directed to fix a new date for the personal hearing. The applicants were instructed to appear and make submissions, after which the respondents should pass a fresh order. The court noted that any additional payment required should be accepted despite the deadline expiration. The process was to be completed within six weeks from the court's order.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the declarations/applications filed under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019.
2. Compliance with the Scheme's payment requirements.
3. Opportunity for personal hearing during the COVID-19 lockdown.
4. Confiscation of goods and imposition of redemption fine under the Scheme.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of the Declarations/Applications Filed Under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019:
The writ applicants sought relief under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, by filing declarations in Form SVLDRS-1. The respondents rejected the applications, claiming that the cases involved confiscation of goods and imposition of redemption fine, which are not covered under Section 129 of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2019. The court observed that the declarations were held void on these grounds, and the applicants were called for a personal hearing which they missed due to the lockdown.

2. Compliance with the Scheme's Payment Requirements:
The applicants asserted that they had already made the necessary payments to avail the Scheme's benefits. They provided details of pre-deposits made as a condition precedent for filing appeals. However, the respondents contended that the payments claimed by the applicants could not be correlated with the demand raised in the show cause notice or the order-in-original. The court directed the respondents to verify the payment records and determine the actual amount deposited by the applicants.

3. Opportunity for Personal Hearing During the COVID-19 Lockdown:
The applicants argued that they were unable to attend the personal hearing scheduled on 07.05.2020 due to the COVID-19 lockdown and the closure of their office and the respondent's office. They requested a virtual hearing, which was not provided. The court agreed with the applicants that a fair opportunity for a personal hearing was not given during the lockdown and directed the respondents to provide a fresh hearing date.

4. Confiscation of Goods and Imposition of Redemption Fine Under the Scheme:
The respondents maintained that the Scheme does not provide relief from confiscation or redemption fine. The court did not delve into the merits of this issue but emphasized that the applicants should explain all relevant aspects before the concerned respondent during the fresh hearing.

Conclusion:
The court quashed the impugned communication in Form SVLDRS-3 and remitted the matter to the Designated Committee, Ahmedabad-South, for a fresh hearing. The respondents were directed to fix a new date for the personal hearing and inform the applicants in writing. The applicants were instructed to appear and make their submissions, after which the respondents should pass a fresh order in accordance with the law. The court also noted that if any additional payment was required, the department should accept it despite the expiration of the deadline, considering the ongoing litigation. The entire process was to be completed within six weeks from the receipt of the court's order.

---