<?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 (7) TMI 64 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773996</link>
    <description>A tax arrears waiver scheme can bar later revisional action where the dealer has already validly obtained its benefit and no suo motu revision was pending when the scheme took effect. Clause 5.7 of the Karasamadhana Scheme, 2021 disqualified only those cases in which revision proceedings had already been initiated as on the Government Order date; since no such proceedings were pending here, the subsequent revisional notice could not be used to undo the waiver of interest and penalty. The revisional authority therefore lacked jurisdiction to invoke Section 64(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 after acceptance of the scheme application, and the scheme relief remained undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2025 08:42:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=833125" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 64 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773996</link>
      <description>A tax arrears waiver scheme can bar later revisional action where the dealer has already validly obtained its benefit and no suo motu revision was pending when the scheme took effect. Clause 5.7 of the Karasamadhana Scheme, 2021 disqualified only those cases in which revision proceedings had already been initiated as on the Government Order date; since no such proceedings were pending here, the subsequent revisional notice could not be used to undo the waiver of interest and penalty. The revisional authority therefore lacked jurisdiction to invoke Section 64(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 after acceptance of the scheme application, and the scheme relief remained undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773996</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>