<?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>1985 (10) TMI 266 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154762</link>
    <description>Pipe and pipe fittings could be brought within the declared commodity entry for steel tubes and tube fittings only if it was first determined that iron and steel pipe and pipe fittings were the same commodity. Because the Tribunal had not recorded that finding, the High Court held that reconsideration was necessary on that limited issue. The Tribunal&#039;s order was therefore quashed to that extent and the matter remitted for a specific finding on commodity identity.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Oct 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2013 12:41:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=171793" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (10) TMI 266 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154762</link>
      <description>Pipe and pipe fittings could be brought within the declared commodity entry for steel tubes and tube fittings only if it was first determined that iron and steel pipe and pipe fittings were the same commodity. Because the Tribunal had not recorded that finding, the High Court held that reconsideration was necessary on that limited issue. The Tribunal&#039;s order was therefore quashed to that extent and the matter remitted for a specific finding on commodity identity.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Oct 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154762</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>