TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the declaration under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme was maintainable where the duty shown on the bills of entry was only tentatively quantified under the court-approved clearance arrangement, and whether the endorsements on the bills of entry or the demand notice issued in respect of one bill of entry satisfied the requirement of a determination of tax arrears or a notice of demand under the Scheme.
Analysis: The Scheme applied only where, under an indirect tax enactment, the amount due had been determined as on 31 March 1998 and remained unpaid, or where the subject matter of a demand notice or show-cause notice issued on or before that date remained unpaid. The endorsements made on the bills of entry were only provisional and were made to facilitate clearance of the goods against bank guarantees pursuant to the interim order of the Court. They were not assessment orders under the Customs Act and did not amount to final determination of duty payable. The later final assessment in 2004 showed that no determination had existed on the date of declaration. Mere quantification on the bills of entry did not constitute a notice of demand under the Scheme. The notice dated 28 July 1994 also did not assist the petitioner, as it related only to one bill of entry, was issued in the context of the interim arrangement, and was itself kept in abeyance.
Conclusion: The declaration was not within the eligible class of tax arrears under the Scheme and was hit by the exclusion in Section 95(ii)(b); the rejection of the declaration was in law.
Ratio Decidendi: A provisional or tentative quantification made only to enable clearance of goods under an interim order does not amount to a final determination of duty or a notice of demand for the purposes of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
