<?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>2004 (2) TMI 754 - KARNATAKAHIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468308</link>
    <description>The Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme required tax arrears to be paid within the stipulated period in the manner prescribed, and a refund could not be treated as satisfaction of that obligation. The Scheme&#039;s language did not permit adding or substituting words to create an adjustment mechanism not expressly provided. Because the actual tax was not paid as required, the request to issue a certificate was rejected and the refusal was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 12:06:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=898844" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (2) TMI 754 - KARNATAKAHIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468308</link>
      <description>The Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme required tax arrears to be paid within the stipulated period in the manner prescribed, and a refund could not be treated as satisfaction of that obligation. The Scheme&#039;s language did not permit adding or substituting words to create an adjustment mechanism not expressly provided. Because the actual tax was not paid as required, the request to issue a certificate was rejected and the refusal was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468308</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>