<?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 (8) TMI 397 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410819</link>
    <description>Under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, pre-deposits and other qualifying payments linked to the same dispute must be deducted when computing the amount payable. Section 124(2) of the Finance Act, 2019 requires adjustment of amounts paid at appellate, enquiry, investigation, or audit stages, and Board circulars also recognise deposits made after a show cause notice, including amounts paid under protest or not yet appropriated. The Scheme&#039;s own mechanism governs such adjustment, and the absence of credit through ST-3 returns does not defeat the claim. On these principles, the Designated Committee&#039;s restrictive estimate and statement were set aside for reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2021 17:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=652204" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (8) TMI 397 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410819</link>
      <description>Under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, pre-deposits and other qualifying payments linked to the same dispute must be deducted when computing the amount payable. Section 124(2) of the Finance Act, 2019 requires adjustment of amounts paid at appellate, enquiry, investigation, or audit stages, and Board circulars also recognise deposits made after a show cause notice, including amounts paid under protest or not yet appropriated. The Scheme&#039;s own mechanism governs such adjustment, and the absence of credit through ST-3 returns does not defeat the claim. On these principles, the Designated Committee&#039;s restrictive estimate and statement were set aside for reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410819</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>