<?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>2025 (6) TMI 768 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772655</link>
    <description>Delay and laches were not treated as fatal where the writ challenge was filed after the rejection was communicated but the interval was not found unreasonable, especially in the context of COVID-19 disruption. Under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, quantification of tax dues by the cut-off date was satisfied by written communication and by the director&#039;s admission of short-paid liability before that date. The petitioner was not to be denied scheme eligibility merely because the investigation was concluded later or the departmental figure differed, and the rejection of the application was set aside with remand for fresh computation and consequential relief on payment with interest within time.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2025 07:21:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=828527" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 768 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772655</link>
      <description>Delay and laches were not treated as fatal where the writ challenge was filed after the rejection was communicated but the interval was not found unreasonable, especially in the context of COVID-19 disruption. Under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, quantification of tax dues by the cut-off date was satisfied by written communication and by the director&#039;s admission of short-paid liability before that date. The petitioner was not to be denied scheme eligibility merely because the investigation was concluded later or the departmental figure differed, and the rejection of the application was set aside with remand for fresh computation and consequential relief on payment with interest within time.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772655</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>