Court quashes SVLDRS-1 rejection, emphasizes natural justice. Remanded for reconsideration with personal hearing.

The court quashed the rejection of the SVLDRS-1 Declaration, citing a violation of natural justice principles. The matter was remanded for reconsideration, with instructions for a personal hearing and a speaking order within six weeks. The court emphasized the need for a liberal interpretation of the Scheme to resolve disputes effectively. The show-cause notice issued was deemed nullified.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of rejection of SVLDRS-1 Declaration.
2. Eligibility of the petitioner under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019.
3. Violation of principles of natural justice.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of Rejection of SVLDRS-1 Declaration:
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to quash the order communicated via email on 14th February 2020, which rejected their SVLDRS-1 Declaration dated 30th December 2019. The petitioner argued that the rejection was improper as the tax dues had been quantified before the cutoff date of 30th June 2019, based on the statement of their director, Mohd. Azhar Ali, recorded on 28th February 2019. The respondents contended that the investigation was ongoing and the tax liability had not been finalized, thus the amount admitted in the statement could not be considered final.

2. Eligibility of the Petitioner under the Scheme:
The petitioner claimed eligibility under Section 125 of the said Scheme, asserting that the tax dues were quantified as per Section 121(r) through the director's statement during the investigation. The respondents argued that since the investigation was not completed and the show-cause notice was issued after 30th June 2019, the petitioner was ineligible. The court examined the definition of "quantified" and concluded that the tax dues admitted in the director's statement before the cutoff date satisfied the Scheme's requirements.

3. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The court noted that the rejection of the Declaration was done without providing the petitioner an opportunity for a personal hearing, which is a violation of the principles of natural justice. The court referred to its previous judgments, emphasizing that summary rejection without hearing leads to adverse civil consequences and is invalid in law. The court held that a personal hearing should have been granted to the petitioner to explain their position.

Conclusion:
The court quashed the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the Designated Committee to reconsider the Declaration filed by the petitioner, providing a personal hearing and passing a speaking order within six weeks. The court emphasized the need for a liberal interpretation of the Scheme to achieve its objective of resolving legacy disputes and allowing businesses to move forward. The show-cause notice issued to the petitioner was also nullified as a result of the remand order.

Order:
1. The impugned order rejecting the SVLDRS-1 Declaration is quashed and set aside.
2. The matter is remanded to the Designated Committee for reconsideration, with a directive to provide a personal hearing and issue a speaking order within six weeks.
3. The show-cause notice issued to the petitioner does not survive.
4. The writ petition is allowed, and the rule is made absolute.
5. No order as to costs.

---