<?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>2010 (2) TMI 1107 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165103</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s decision to tax the vacuum cleaner at 12% for the periods in question. The court found no merit in the petitioner&#039;s arguments regarding the prospective nature of the notification or the consistency of previous assessments. The principles of law and judgments cited by the petitioner were deemed inapplicable to the case at hand. The court did not award costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2014 09:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=355277" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 1107 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165103</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s decision to tax the vacuum cleaner at 12% for the periods in question. The court found no merit in the petitioner&#039;s arguments regarding the prospective nature of the notification or the consistency of previous assessments. The principles of law and judgments cited by the petitioner were deemed inapplicable to the case at hand. The court did not award costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165103</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>