https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415418 The court, in a writ petition under Article 226, ruled in favor of the petitioner, an assessee for service tax. The Designated Committee's disagreement with the petitioner's computation under the amnesty scheme was overturned. The court held that the petitioner could deduct deposits made before the show cause notice issuance, including amounts paid under interest and penalty heads. Section 124 of the Finance Act, 2019 was interpreted to allow deductions for any amounts paid during the audit process, irrespective of the specific head under which the payment was made. The Designated Committee was directed to reconsider the claim and specify the petitioner's payment obligations. en-us Tue, 30 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 May 2022 16:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415418 The court, in a writ petition under Article 226, ruled in favor of the petitioner, an assessee for service tax. The Designated Committee's disagreement with the petitioner's computation under the amnesty scheme was overturned. The court held that the petitioner could deduct deposits made before the show cause notice issuance, including amounts paid under interest and penalty heads. Section 124 of the Finance Act, 2019 was interpreted to allow deductions for any amounts paid during the audit process, irrespective of the specific head under which the payment was made. The Designated Committee was directed to reconsider the claim and specify the petitioner's payment obligations. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 30 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415418