https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200082 A taxpayer who voluntarily sought compounding, accepted the composition order, and paid the demanded amount could not reopen the completed proceedings by relying on a later declaration of law. However, the proviso to section 74(1)(a) had to be applied according to its plain text: where it fixed the maximum compounding fee for a single offence spread over multiple return periods in a financial year, the higher figure in the main clause could not be imported into the proviso. The composition order was therefore sustained in principle, but the fee was reduced to the statutory ceiling. en-us Tue, 06 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Mar 2018 07:51:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200082 A taxpayer who voluntarily sought compounding, accepted the composition order, and paid the demanded amount could not reopen the completed proceedings by relying on a later declaration of law. However, the proviso to section 74(1)(a) had to be applied according to its plain text: where it fixed the maximum compounding fee for a single offence spread over multiple return periods in a financial year, the higher figure in the main clause could not be imported into the proviso. The composition order was therefore sustained in principle, but the fee was reduced to the statutory ceiling. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 06 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200082