<?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 (9) TMI 935 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412590</link>
    <description>Rejection of a declaration under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 without granting a hearing was contrary to the Scheme&#039;s mandate. The Scheme was treated as a benevolent mechanism for settling legacy indirect tax disputes, and the designated committee was required to follow Section 127, including giving the declarant an opportunity of hearing where the estimated amount exceeded the declared amount. A rejection entered only by way of remarks, without hearing the declarant, failed to satisfy natural justice and the statutory procedure. The rejection was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration after hearing the declarant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Nov 2021 17:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=656443" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (9) TMI 935 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412590</link>
      <description>Rejection of a declaration under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 without granting a hearing was contrary to the Scheme&#039;s mandate. The Scheme was treated as a benevolent mechanism for settling legacy indirect tax disputes, and the designated committee was required to follow Section 127, including giving the declarant an opportunity of hearing where the estimated amount exceeded the declared amount. A rejection entered only by way of remarks, without hearing the declarant, failed to satisfy natural justice and the statutory procedure. The rejection was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration after hearing the declarant.</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=412590</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>