<?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>2021 (3) TMI 293 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404965</link>
    <description>Eligibility under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 depended on duty being quantified on or before 30 June 2019 in cases arising from enquiry or investigation. The term &quot;quantified&quot; was read to mean a written communication of the duty payable, and scheme circulars allowed a departmental letter or amount admitted during enquiry, investigation, or audit to qualify. A taxpayer&#039;s unilateral admission or self-computation, however, was not enough; the quantification had to be by the department. On that basis, a petitioner&#039;s letter admitting service tax liability did not satisfy the cut-off requirement, and rejection of the declaration was upheld. The challenge to the show cause notice was not entertained because statutory remedies were available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2022 14:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=638364" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (3) TMI 293 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404965</link>
      <description>Eligibility under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 depended on duty being quantified on or before 30 June 2019 in cases arising from enquiry or investigation. The term &quot;quantified&quot; was read to mean a written communication of the duty payable, and scheme circulars allowed a departmental letter or amount admitted during enquiry, investigation, or audit to qualify. A taxpayer&#039;s unilateral admission or self-computation, however, was not enough; the quantification had to be by the department. On that basis, a petitioner&#039;s letter admitting service tax liability did not satisfy the cut-off requirement, and rejection of the declaration was upheld. The challenge to the show cause notice was not entertained because statutory remedies were available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404965</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>