Just a moment...

Top
Help
Upgrade to AI Search

We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:

1. Basic
Quick overview summary answering your query with referencesCategory-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI

2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
Detailed report covering:
     -   Overview Summary
     -   Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
     -   Relevant Case Laws
     -   Tariff / Classification / HSN
     -   Expert views from TaxTMI
     -   Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy

• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:

Explore AI Search

Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites

×

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.
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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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 :
        Central Excise

        2025 (1) TMI 1033 - AT - Central Excise

        📋
        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

        Co-noticees entitled to penalty waiver under Sabka Vishwas Scheme without filing declarations when main noticees settled liabilities CESTAT New Delhi held that co-noticees are entitled to penalty waiver under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 even without filing ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
                        Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

                          Co-noticees entitled to penalty waiver under Sabka Vishwas Scheme without filing declarations when main noticees settled liabilities

                          CESTAT New Delhi held that co-noticees are entitled to penalty waiver under Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 even without filing declarations, when main noticees have settled duty liabilities and obtained discharge certificates. The tribunal ruled that failure to file declaration constitutes merely a procedural flaw and cannot justify penalty imposition, particularly when no revenue loss occurred. Following precedent in VK Aggarwal case, the tribunal emphasized that procedural oversights should not result in penalties if main parties have resolved their liabilities. The impugned order was set aside and appeal allowed.




                          1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

                          The core legal questions considered in this judgment are:

                          • Whether the appellants are eligible for a waiver of the penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, after the main noticees have settled their duty liabilities under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019.
                          • Whether the failure of the appellants to file a declaration under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme constitutes a procedural flaw that should not result in the imposition of penalties.

                          2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

                          Issue 1: Eligibility for Waiver of Penalty

                          • Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The legal framework involves Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, and the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. The Tribunal referenced several precedents, including decisions in cases such as VK Aggarwal versus Commissioner of Central Tax and others, which discuss the implications of the main noticee settling under the scheme.
                          • Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal interpreted that the Sabka Vishwas Scheme aims to resolve legacy disputes and reduce litigation. The court reasoned that once the main noticees have settled their liabilities, co-noticees like the appellants should also benefit from the scheme's relief provisions.
                          • Key Evidence and Findings: The main noticees, including M/s Asha Food Products, settled their cases under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme, receiving a discharge certificate. The appellants did not file a declaration under the scheme, which was central to the Tribunal's consideration.
                          • Application of Law to Facts: The Tribunal applied the provisions of the Sabka Vishwas Scheme, noting that the appellants would have paid "nil" duty if they had applied under the scheme, thus indicating that the penalty imposition was unwarranted.
                          • Treatment of Competing Arguments: The Tribunal considered the argument that the appellants' failure to file a declaration should not result in penalties, as this was a procedural flaw with no revenue loss. It contrasted this with the respondent's position that penalties were justified.
                          • Conclusions: The Tribunal concluded that the appellants were entitled to a waiver of the penalty, as the imposition of such penalties would contradict the objectives of the Sabka Vishwas Scheme.

                          Issue 2: Procedural Flaw in Filing Declaration

                          • Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The Tribunal considered the procedural requirements under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme and related circulars. Precedents highlighted include decisions where non-filing of declarations was deemed a procedural flaw.
                          • Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Tribunal reasoned that the non-filing of a declaration by the appellants was a procedural oversight, not a substantive failure warranting penalties.
                          • Key Evidence and Findings: The appellants' failure to file the declaration was identified as a procedural issue, with the Tribunal noting that the main noticees' discharge certificates effectively settled the matter.
                          • Application of Law to Facts: The Tribunal applied the scheme's provisions, determining that the appellants' procedural oversight should not result in penalties, especially given the absence of revenue loss.
                          • Treatment of Competing Arguments: The Tribunal weighed the procedural nature of the appellants' oversight against the respondent's justification for penalties, ultimately siding with the appellants.
                          • Conclusions: The Tribunal concluded that the procedural flaw did not justify the imposition of penalties, aligning with the scheme's intent to resolve disputes and reduce litigation.

                          3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

                          • Preserve Verbatim Quotes of Crucial Legal Reasoning: "The Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 has the potential to liquidate the huge outstanding litigation and free the taxpayers from the burden of litigation and investigation under the legacy taxes."
                          • Core Principles Established: The Tribunal established that procedural oversights, such as the failure to file a declaration under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme, should not result in penalties if the main noticees have settled their liabilities. The scheme's purpose is to resolve disputes and reduce litigation, not to penalize procedural errors.
                          • Final Determinations on Each Issue: The Tribunal set aside the penalties imposed on the appellants, concluding that they were entitled to relief under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme, despite the procedural oversight of not filing a declaration.

                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found