https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267215 Section 95 of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, excluding persons prosecuted for specified socio-economic offences and related proceedings from settlement benefits, was upheld as a valid fiscal classification under Article 14. The exclusion was held to bear an intelligible differentia and a rational nexus with the scheme's object of settling pending tax disputes, expediting revenue collection, and extending immunity only to eligible declarants. The fact that the scheme could have been drafted more broadly, or that some cases may appear under-inclusive, was not enough to show arbitrariness or hostile discrimination. Contentions based on complaints, minor offences, and civil-liability proceedings did not displace the presumption of constitutionality. en-us Tue, 13 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 May 2016 12:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267215 Section 95 of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, excluding persons prosecuted for specified socio-economic offences and related proceedings from settlement benefits, was upheld as a valid fiscal classification under Article 14. The exclusion was held to bear an intelligible differentia and a rational nexus with the scheme's object of settling pending tax disputes, expediting revenue collection, and extending immunity only to eligible declarants. The fact that the scheme could have been drafted more broadly, or that some cases may appear under-inclusive, was not enough to show arbitrariness or hostile discrimination. Contentions based on complaints, minor offences, and civil-liability proceedings did not displace the presumption of constitutionality. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 13 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267215