<?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 (10) TMI 1312 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301616</link>
    <description>A belated writ challenge to a tax determination under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 was not entertained because the explanation for delay was not accepted and the Scheme had already expired. With no practical scope for effective relief after the Scheme&#039;s cessation, the Court declined interference and dismissed the petition. The governing principle was that a late challenge to a determination under an expired scheme does not justify writ relief where no effective remedy remains.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2022 09:12:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=675728" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (10) TMI 1312 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301616</link>
      <description>A belated writ challenge to a tax determination under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 was not entertained because the explanation for delay was not accepted and the Scheme had already expired. With no practical scope for effective relief after the Scheme&#039;s cessation, the Court declined interference and dismissed the petition. The governing principle was that a late challenge to a determination under an expired scheme does not justify writ relief where no effective remedy remains.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301616</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>