<?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 (11) TMI 946 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415165</link>
    <description>Section 124(2) of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 requires deduction of any pre-deposit made during appellate proceedings while computing the amount payable. The High Court noted that the declarant had produced challans at the personal hearing and had sought consideration of the claimed pre-deposit, yet the estimate in Form SVLDRS-2 omitted that amount and the rejection order did not address the material placed before the Designated Committee. In these circumstances, a cryptic rejection ignoring relevant documents was liable to be set aside, and the declaration required fresh consideration under the scheme after verifying whether the payment related to the appeal dispute.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Nov 2021 08:57:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=662272" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (11) TMI 946 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415165</link>
      <description>Section 124(2) of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 requires deduction of any pre-deposit made during appellate proceedings while computing the amount payable. The High Court noted that the declarant had produced challans at the personal hearing and had sought consideration of the claimed pre-deposit, yet the estimate in Form SVLDRS-2 omitted that amount and the rejection order did not address the material placed before the Designated Committee. In these circumstances, a cryptic rejection ignoring relevant documents was liable to be set aside, and the declaration required fresh consideration under the scheme after verifying whether the payment related to the appeal dispute.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415165</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>