Curable identity defects cannot defeat a beneficial dispute-resolution scheme when the applicant remains otherwise eligible.

A beneficial dispute-resolution scheme could not be denied on curable identity defects where the penalty had been imposed on the applicant in his individual capacity and no statutory ineligibility was shown under Section 125 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019. The mismatch in surname and PAN was a technical error capable of correction, especially where the authorities had accepted a connected declaration without objection. A prior judicial direction was not required to compel merits-based consideration of the representation. The declaration was therefore to be processed with correction of the name and PAN, and the next form under the scheme was to be issued.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of the petitioner's SVLDRS-1 declaration and the refusal to consider the subsequent representation were justified merely because the declaration mentioned a HUF PAN and a different surname, despite the underlying penalty having been imposed on the petitioner and the petitioner otherwise being eligible for the scheme.

Analysis: The Scheme was intended to reduce legacy litigation and grant substantial relief in respect of pending excise disputes, including cases where only penalty was in issue. The petitioner was not shown to be ineligible under the disqualifying categories in Section 125 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019, and the penalty in dispute had admittedly been imposed on the petitioner in his individual capacity. The mismatch in surname and PAN was a curable technical defect, particularly when the authorities had already accepted the declaration in a connected matter without objection. The representation could not be rejected on the ground that no prior judicial direction had quashed the earlier decision, because the petitioner had been permitted to make a representation and the authority was bound to decide it on merits.

Conclusion: The rejection on technical grounds was unjustified, and the petitioner was entitled to have the declaration processed with correction of the name and PAN and issuance of the next form under the Scheme.

Ratio Decidendi: A declaration under a beneficial dispute-resolution scheme cannot be rejected on curable technical defects in identity particulars when the applicant is otherwise the person against whom the penalty has been imposed and is not statutorily ineligible for the scheme.

---