<?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>2022 (5) TMI 986 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422726</link>
    <description>A VCES declaration may be rejected only if the statutory preconditions under Section 106(2) of the Finance Act, 2013 are established, namely a pending enquiry, investigation or audit on the relevant date. The record did not show reliable documentary proof of such a pending proceeding; later verification activity and summons were insufficient. Action against a false declaration also had to be taken within the one-year limitation in Section 111(2), and the rejection notice was issued beyond that period. An executive circular could not override or extend the statutory time limit. The declaration was therefore not liable to rejection, and immunity under the scheme remained available subject to its express exceptions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2023 16:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=679775" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (5) TMI 986 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422726</link>
      <description>A VCES declaration may be rejected only if the statutory preconditions under Section 106(2) of the Finance Act, 2013 are established, namely a pending enquiry, investigation or audit on the relevant date. The record did not show reliable documentary proof of such a pending proceeding; later verification activity and summons were insufficient. Action against a false declaration also had to be taken within the one-year limitation in Section 111(2), and the rejection notice was issued beyond that period. An executive circular could not override or extend the statutory time limit. The declaration was therefore not liable to rejection, and immunity under the scheme remained available subject to its express exceptions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422726</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>