<?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>section 74</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/forum/issue?id=119721</link>
    <description>A single show cause notice under the fraud provision covered multiple assessment years but led to an order for one year due to time bar; the adjudicating authority may confirm demand under the non fraud provision where facts lack indicators of fraud, conversion of proceedings to non fraud without separate SCNs is permissible, and judicial dicta support treating post notice reversal of tax and mere rate difference shortfalls as unsuitable bases for sustaining penalties under fraud provisions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2025 11:18:51 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Mar 2025 17:03:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=806384" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>section 74</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/forum/issue?id=119721</link>
      <description>A single show cause notice under the fraud provision covered multiple assessment years but led to an order for one year due to time bar; the adjudicating authority may confirm demand under the non fraud provision where facts lack indicators of fraud, conversion of proceedings to non fraud without separate SCNs is permissible, and judicial dicta support treating post notice reversal of tax and mere rate difference shortfalls as unsuitable bases for sustaining penalties under fraud provisions.</description>
      <category>Discussion-Forum</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2025 11:18:51 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/forum/issue?id=119721</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>