Reasoned decision requirement under Sabka Vishwas Scheme applies when disputed credit is reduced without recorded grounds.

Under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, when a declarant disputes the estimated amount, the Designated Committee must consider the objections, record the points of difference, and give reasons if the objection is not accepted. A rejection that reduces claimed credit without explaining why the larger credit is denied is deficient, and the validity of the decision must be tested from the order itself, not from later explanations in a counter-affidavit. The article also notes the Board's clarification that persons facing service tax disputes on renting of immovable property may avail the Scheme, so the petitioner's credit claim required verification in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of the declaration under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, without recording reasons for refusing credit of alleged payments made by the lessees, could be sustained, and whether the matter required fresh consideration by the Designated Committee.

Analysis: The declaration under the Scheme moved through the prescribed stages of filing, estimation, objection and final form, and where the declarant disputes the estimate, the authority is required to deal with the objections and, if they are not accepted, record the points of difference and reasons. The impugned communication reduced the credit claimed by the petitioner but did not explain why the larger credit was rejected. The supporting counter-affidavit supplied reasons that were absent from the order itself, but the validity of an administrative decision has to be tested from the order as passed. The Court also noticed the Board's clarification permitting persons covered by service tax disputes on renting of immovable property to avail the Scheme, and held that the petitioner's claim required verification in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The rejection order was deficient for want of reasons and the matter was remitted to the Designated Committee for fresh hearing and a reasoned decision on the petitioner's claim for credit of payments allegedly made by the lessees.

---