Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to the benefit of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme when tax had been determined in an assessment order before 31 March 1998, although that determination was later set aside in appeal and the matter was remanded for redetermination.
Analysis: The relevant requirement under section 87(m) of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme was that tax should have been determined on or before 31 March 1998. A prior determination does not cease to exist merely because appellate proceedings later result in remand and the redetermination remains pending. The scheme is intended to resolve tax disputes and bring litigation to an end, and its benefit cannot be denied on the ground that the original determination was not yet final when the scheme was invoked. The subsequent remand proceedings were treated as a continuation of the earlier assessment, and the existence of a prior determination was sufficient for the scheme.
Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to the benefit of the Scheme; the refusal by the Revenue was unsustainable.
Final Conclusion: Prior determination of tax before the cutoff date satisfied the statutory condition, and later appellate remand did not deprive the assessee of relief under the Scheme.
Ratio Decidendi: For the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, a tax liability determined on or before the cutoff date remains a qualifying determination even if the assessment is later set aside in appeal and redetermination is pending.