Abhishek Raja "Ram"
8 months ago
ā¢View on X
š¦š²šæšš¶š°š² š§š®š ā š”š²š šš²š¹šµš¶ šš¶š“šµ šš¼ššæš: šš¼šæ š¦š®šÆšøš® š©š¶ššµšš®š š¦š°šµš²šŗš², š§šµš² š§š®š ššš²š š°š¼š»š³š¶šæšŗš²š± šÆš š¢šæš¶š“š¶š»š®š¹ ššššµš¼šæš¶šš ššµš®š¹š¹ šÆš² ššµš² šÆš®šš¶š š³š¼šæ šš²šš²šæšŗš¶š»š¶š»š“ š§š®š ššš²š š¢ š§šµš² šš¼ššæš šµš²š¹š±: ax dues confirmed by the original authority are considered for the Sabka Vishwas Scheme, overriding the Designated Committee's determination.
š šš®š°šš: šš¼šŗš½š®š»š: M/s Jainsons, represented by Mukesh Jain, Proprietor ššššš²: Whether the demand of Central Excise Duty of Rs. 1,11,35,419/- is valid for determining dues under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme. šš°šš¶šš¶šš: On 11th December 2009, a raid led to goods' seizure, and a show-cause notice confirmed a demand of Rs. 1.11 crore.
āļø ššš±š“š²šŗš²š»š: The Court ruled that the tax dues confirmed in the original order of Rs. 1,11,35,419/- should be considered for the Sabka Vishwas Scheme. Emphasizing a liberal interpretation of the Scheme, the Court directed the Respondent to issue a fresh form based on the original confirmed dues, setting aside the previous determination.
š šš®šš² šš»š³š¼šæšŗš®šš¶š¼š»: š§š¶šš¹š²: Mukesh Jain Proprietor of M/s Jainsons vs. Union of India ā Service Tax š¢šæš±š²šæ šš®šš²: 22 November 2022 š The ruling confirms that the tax dues confirmed by the original authority are the basis for the Sabka Vishwas Scheme.
Page created with TweetHunter
Write your own