Mandatory payment timeline under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme cannot be extended beyond the statutory period.

The time limit in section 67(1) of the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997 for payment of tax after filing a declaration was mandatory. Tax under section 66 had to accompany the declaration, and section 67(1) allowed payment within three months only as a limited statutory exception, together with interest and proof of payment. The Scheme required strict compliance with its conditions, and failure attracted the express consequence under section 67(2) that the declaration would be deemed never to have been made. No equitable extension, implied power to enlarge time, or reliance on general limitation or circular provisions could override this requirement.

---

---

Issues: Whether the period prescribed in section 67(1) of the Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997 for payment of tax after filing a declaration was extendable or mandatory.

Analysis: The Scheme required tax under section 66 to be paid with the declaration, while section 67(1) created only a limited exception permitting payment within three months from the date of declaration with simple interest. The language of section 67(1), read with section 67(2), showed that payment of tax, payment of interest, and filing of proof of payment had all to be completed within the stipulated period. The Scheme was a beneficent statutory code, but a declarant claiming its benefit had to satisfy its conditions strictly. The consequence of failure was expressly provided by section 67(2), namely that the declaration would be deemed never to have been made. There was therefore no room for extension on equitable grounds, no implied power in the designated authority to enlarge time, and no support for treating the period as flexible by reference to the general clauses or limitation provisions or a circular under section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Conclusion: The period under section 67(1) was mandatory and not extendable, and the contention of the assessees was rejected.

---