Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Petitioner granted Sabka Vishwas Scheme benefits despite delayed payment due to technical glitch beyond control</h1> <h3>Sitec Labs Limited formerly known as Sitec Labs Private Limited, Versus The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, The Designated Committee, Belapur Commissionerate, The Deputy Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Belapur Commissionerate,</h3> Bombay HC allowed petitioner to avail benefits under Sabka Vishwas Scheme despite failure to make payment within prescribed time. Court held that ... Challenge to letters issued by Deputy Commissioner under Sabka Vishwas Scheme - Failure to make the payment of the amount mentioned in SVLDRS-3 form - HELD THAT:- The Respondents having not rebutted the averments made by the Petitioner which states that on account of technical glitch, the Petitioner could not make the payment and a grievance was raised by the Petitioner with the Respondents on this count and the admitted fact, as stated in the affidavit-in-reply that Petitioner is willing to make payment, in our view the Petitioner should not be denied the benefit of the SVLDRS when no fault can be attributed to the Petitioner. The Petitioner is justified in relying upon the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of JJAI SAI RAM MECH & TECH INDIA P. LTD., VERSUS UNION OF INDIA, JOINT COMMISSIONER SABKA VISHWAS COMMITTEE OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER CGST & CENTRAL EXCISE OF PALGHAR, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER CGST & CENTRAL EXCISE OF PALGHAR. [2024 (4) TMI 236 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] wherein on identical facts situation this Court had permitted declarant to make the payment and avail the benefit of SVLDR scheme. There are no reason for taking a different view. Application disposed off. Issues involved: Challenge to letters issued by Deputy Commissioner under Sabka Vishwas Scheme for non-payment of demand raised in Order-In-Original.Summary:The petitioner challenged letters from Deputy Commissioner directing payment of demand raised in Order-In-Original due to non-payment under Sabka Vishwas Scheme. The petitioner, engaged in technical testing services, filed a declaration under the scheme in 2019. Despite generating a challan for payment within the stipulated time, technical glitches prevented actual payment. The petitioner sought relief based on similar cases where relief was granted. The respondents argued that non-payment within the prescribed time disqualifies the petitioner from the scheme, citing relevant legal precedents. The court examined the facts, including technical issues faced by the petitioner, and noted the respondents' admission of difficulties faced by declarants. The court found in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing that no fault could be attributed to them for non-payment. Legal precedents supported the petitioner's position, distinguishing the cited cases based on technical glitches. The court ordered the quashing of the letters and directed the respondents to accept payment and issue the necessary certificate within specified timelines.The court found in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing that no fault could be attributed to them for non-payment. Legal precedents supported the petitioner's position, distinguishing the cited cases based on technical glitches. The court ordered the quashing of the letters and directed the respondents to accept payment and issue the necessary certificate within specified timelines.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found