<?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>2024 (7) TMI 815 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755595</link>
    <description>Under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, the designated committee must verify the declaration, issue an estimate where the quantified amount differs, and give a hearing before finalising the payable sum. Once the committee issued the estimate and quantified the amount payable, it could not reopen the declaration and reject eligibility on the ground that the declaration was not separately quantifiable before the relevant date. Refusal to accept payment after the declarant accepted the quantified amount was inconsistent with the Scheme, and the petitioner was entitled to settlement. The rejection orders were unsustainable, and the respondents had to permit payment of the quantified amount with interest and issue Form SVLDRS-3.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jul 2024 10:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=760227" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 815 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755595</link>
      <description>Under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, the designated committee must verify the declaration, issue an estimate where the quantified amount differs, and give a hearing before finalising the payable sum. Once the committee issued the estimate and quantified the amount payable, it could not reopen the declaration and reject eligibility on the ground that the declaration was not separately quantifiable before the relevant date. Refusal to accept payment after the declarant accepted the quantified amount was inconsistent with the Scheme, and the petitioner was entitled to settlement. The rejection orders were unsustainable, and the respondents had to permit payment of the quantified amount with interest and issue Form SVLDRS-3.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755595</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>