https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757443 Relief under the Sabka Vishwas scheme was treated as available where the dispute concerned only penalty and the duty was already paid or nil, so the statutory benefit under Section 124(1)(b) did not depend on the Designated Committee's discretion in that situation. Filing a declaration was regarded as a procedural step, and denying relief solely because the co-noticees had not filed one would undermine the scheme's substantive purpose. Applying this position, the Tribunal held that once the main noticee had obtained discharge under the scheme, the co-noticees in the same proceedings could not be denied consequential relief from penalty. The penalty on the appellants was therefore not sustainable. en-us Fri, 23 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Aug 2024 08:17:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757443 Relief under the Sabka Vishwas scheme was treated as available where the dispute concerned only penalty and the duty was already paid or nil, so the statutory benefit under Section 124(1)(b) did not depend on the Designated Committee's discretion in that situation. Filing a declaration was regarded as a procedural step, and denying relief solely because the co-noticees had not filed one would undermine the scheme's substantive purpose. Applying this position, the Tribunal held that once the main noticee had obtained discharge under the scheme, the co-noticees in the same proceedings could not be denied consequential relief from penalty. The penalty on the appellants was therefore not sustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 23 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757443