Sabka Vishwas arrears declaration cannot be rejected merely because the department later contemplates or files an appeal.

Under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, a declaration in the arrears category cannot be rejected merely because the department later contemplated or filed an appeal. The Designated Committee's role is limited to verifying the declaration and computing the amount payable within the statutory scheme; it has no authority to deny relief on a ground not supported by the scheme text. Where no appeal was pending on the relevant cut-off date and the matter otherwise fell within arrears, the declaration could not be shifted into the litigation category solely because a departmental appeal was filed later. The rejection was therefore unsustainable as beyond jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Designated Committee was justified in rejecting the petitioner's declaration under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 on the ground that the department contemplated filing an appeal, and whether the petitioner's case fell within the "arrears" category rather than the "litigation" category.

Analysis: The scheme provisions distinguish between "amount in arrears" and "tax dues" arising in litigation, enquiry, investigation, or audit. A declaration under the arrears category is governed by the statutory text, and the Designated Committee's role is confined to verifying the declaration and estimating the amount payable. The committee is not vested with authority to deny the benefit of the scheme merely because the department later decided to prefer an appeal against the order in original. On the facts, the show cause notice was issued after the relevant cut-off date, no appeal was pending as on the cut-off date, and the departmental appeal was filed only later. In these circumstances, the case could not be shifted out of the arrears category solely on account of a contemplated or subsequently filed departmental appeal. The circular relied upon by the respondents did not authorise rejection on such a ground, and the impugned rejection travelled beyond the statutory framework of the scheme.

Conclusion: The rejection of the declaration was without jurisdiction and unsustainable. The petitioner was entitled to have the declaration considered under the scheme in accordance with law, with consequential benefits.

Ratio Decidendi: Under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, the Designated Committee cannot reject a declaration in the arrears category merely because the department later proposes or files an appeal; its function is limited to verification and computation within the statutory scheme.

---