<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2020 (1) TMI 944 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391331</link>
    <description>The CGST Act saving clause preserves pending service tax investigations, inquiries, audits, assessments, adjudications, recovery and related proceedings despite repeal of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994. A jurisdictional notification issued under the Central Excise Act and Rules continued to apply to service tax proceedings through the machinery provisions of the Finance Act, so the challenge to its validity failed. A show cause notice ordinarily must be answered before the designated authority and will not be quashed in writ jurisdiction absent clear exceptional circumstances. The notice remained operative, while time was granted for a response and coercive action was deferred until completion of the reply and decision process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=601463" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (1) TMI 944 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391331</link>
      <description>The CGST Act saving clause preserves pending service tax investigations, inquiries, audits, assessments, adjudications, recovery and related proceedings despite repeal of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994. A jurisdictional notification issued under the Central Excise Act and Rules continued to apply to service tax proceedings through the machinery provisions of the Finance Act, so the challenge to its validity failed. A show cause notice ordinarily must be answered before the designated authority and will not be quashed in writ jurisdiction absent clear exceptional circumstances. The notice remained operative, while time was granted for a response and coercive action was deferred until completion of the reply and decision process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391331</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>