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 rejection of the applications under the Karasamadhana Scheme, 2017 for non-submission through the website and alleged non-payment of 10% interest arrears was sustainable.
Analysis: The petitioner had already deposited 30% of the arrears before the Appellate Authority, and that deposit could not be treated as appropriated towards any specific head until the appeal proceedings attained finality. On that basis, the deposit retained the character of a colourless deposit and the revenue could not insist upon an additional 10% payment as a precondition for availing the scheme. The inability to file the application through the website was also found unjustified because the system did not permit adjustment of the amount already lying in deposit. The demand notice and assessment order together showed that the interest component formed part of the total demand, so denial of the scheme benefit on the ground that no arrears of interest were separately demanded was held untenable.
Conclusion: The rejection of the applications was unsustainable, and the petitioner was entitled to have the applications accepted and to receive the benefit of the scheme, subject to satisfaction of the tax payment requirement.