Court upholds order in Writ Petition challenging Sabka Vishwas Scheme decision, emphasizes strict timelines. Petitioner directed to pursue statutory appeal.

The court upheld the impugned order in a Writ Petition challenging a decision under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme, emphasizing the scheme's strict timelines. The petitioner's request for payment extension due to Covid-19 impact was denied, directing them to pursue remedies through statutory appeal and seek relief from the tax authorities. The court highlighted the need for officers to adhere to scheme guidelines unless authorized deviations exist, directing the petitioner to file a statutory appeal within 30 days and seek relaxation under the scheme. The Writ Petition was disposed of with observations on available remedies, with no costs awarded.

---

---

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme 2019.
2. Impact of Covid-19 lockdown on payment deadlines under the scheme.
3. Judicial precedents on condonation of delays in tax payment schemes.
4. Authority of officers to deviate from time-bound schemes.
5. Remedies available to the petitioner for relief.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to challenge Order-in-Original No.54 of 2020 ADC, dated 31.12.2020, under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme. The petitioner requested the court to direct the first respondent to enable payment as ordered under SVLDRS-3 on 09.04.2020.

2. The petitioner opted for the Sabka Vishwas Scheme by the extended deadline of 15.01.2020, with a fixed liability of &8377; 12,68,886.80. Due to Covid-19 lockdown impacting business operations, the petitioner sought an extension for payment, which was not granted, leading to the impugned order on 31.12.2020.

3. The petitioner cited a Supreme Court case where delays were condoned in a similar scheme, emphasizing the adverse impact of Covid-19 on their ability to make payments. The Senior Standing Counsel for respondents argued that the time-bound nature of the scheme should have been complied with, regardless of external circumstances.

4. The court acknowledged the petitioner's situation but highlighted the scheme's strict timelines. It emphasized that officers must adhere to the scheme's guidelines unless appropriate deviations are authorized. Consequently, the impugned order was upheld, directing the petitioner to pursue remedies through statutory appeal and seek relaxation from the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs.

5. The court directed the petitioner to file a statutory appeal within 30 days and approach the appropriate authorities for relief under the scheme due to the Covid-19 lockdown. The judgment concluded by disposing of the Writ Petition with observations on available remedies and no costs awarded. The connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed accordingly.

---