Supreme Court rules in favor of appellant in Income Declaration Scheme case, orders remittance to respondents.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing that the delay in appearance by the respondents was not justified as a Ministry of Finance notification had already been issued. The Court held that the appellant was entitled to relief under the Income Declaration Scheme of 2016, and as the amount had been deposited in court with interest, it should be remitted to the respondents. The Court declined the respondents' request for further time, stating that no additional instructions were necessary due to the notification. The civil appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant as per the judgment.

---

---

Issues:
1. Delay in appearance by respondents.
2. Applicability of Ministry of Finance notification.
3. Request for further time by respondents.
4. Entitlement to relief under Income Declaration Scheme of 2016.

Delay in Appearance by Respondents:
The Supreme Court noted that the respondents appeared three years after the notice was issued in the case. Despite seeking further time to obtain instructions, the Court declined the request, emphasizing that since a notification had already been issued by the Ministry of Finance, no further instructions were necessary. The Court held that the appellant was entitled to relief in accordance with the notification, and as the amount had already been deposited in court with interest, it should be remitted to the respondents.

Applicability of Ministry of Finance Notification:
The petitioner's counsel argued that the case fell under a notification dated 13.12.2019 of the Ministry of Finance, allowing defaulters to deposit the amount with interest. It was highlighted that the amount, along with interest, had been deposited in court pursuant to an earlier order. The respondents' counsel requested time to obtain instructions, but the Court ruled that since a notification had been issued, no further instructions were required. Consequently, the appellant was deemed entitled to the benefits of the Income Declaration Scheme of 2016.

Request for Further Time by Respondents:
The respondents' counsel initially sought a short accommodation to obtain instructions, which was granted. However, when further time was requested, the Court declined the extension. The Court pointed out that since a relevant notification had already been issued, additional instructions were unnecessary. The respondents were directed to provide particulars for remittance of the deposited amount with any further accrued interest to the appellant.

Entitlement to Relief under Income Declaration Scheme of 2016:
As a result of the Court's findings regarding the applicability of the Ministry of Finance notification and the amount already deposited in court, the appellant was declared entitled to the benefits of the Income Declaration Scheme of 2016. Consequently, the civil appeal was allowed to the extent mentioned in the judgment.

---