<?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 (7) TMI 222 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409380</link>
    <description>Under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, a verified deposit made after the show cause notice but before adjudication must be credited while computing tax dues where the statutory framework and clarificatory circular permit such adjustment. The court found that the petitioner&#039;s payment was supported by challans and was not shown to be fictitious or otherwise disproved on merits. Technical objections and unverified database entries could not override the scheme&#039;s settlement purpose or defeat the claimant&#039;s entitlement to credit for the deposit. The impugned exclusion of the amount was therefore unsustainable, and the matter required fresh verification and issuance of a revised statement after accounting for the deposit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2022 11:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=648844" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (7) TMI 222 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409380</link>
      <description>Under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, a verified deposit made after the show cause notice but before adjudication must be credited while computing tax dues where the statutory framework and clarificatory circular permit such adjustment. The court found that the petitioner&#039;s payment was supported by challans and was not shown to be fictitious or otherwise disproved on merits. Technical objections and unverified database entries could not override the scheme&#039;s settlement purpose or defeat the claimant&#039;s entitlement to credit for the deposit. The impugned exclusion of the amount was therefore unsustainable, and the matter required fresh verification and issuance of a revised statement after accounting for the deposit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409380</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>