https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47823 The Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme applied only to pending or disputed tax arrears as on the relevant date, and it could not revive a duty liability already finally adjudicated and merely being implemented through later RT-12 endorsements. Where no qualifying demand notice or pending indirect-tax proceeding existed, the declaration fell within the statutory exclusions under Section 95(ii)(b) and Section 95(ii)(c) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998. Writ relief was also treated as inappropriate where the duty burden had been passed on to customers and reopening the concluded liability would confer an undue benefit. en-us Wed, 29 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 May 2024 12:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47823 The Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme applied only to pending or disputed tax arrears as on the relevant date, and it could not revive a duty liability already finally adjudicated and merely being implemented through later RT-12 endorsements. Where no qualifying demand notice or pending indirect-tax proceeding existed, the declaration fell within the statutory exclusions under Section 95(ii)(b) and Section 95(ii)(c) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998. Writ relief was also treated as inappropriate where the duty burden had been passed on to customers and reopening the concluded liability would confer an undue benefit. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 29 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47823