<?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>2014 (10) TMI 184 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252050</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, stating that no substantial question of law arose in the case. They found that the assessing officer&#039;s actions were premature, and the issue of benefit accrual due to demutualization was not substantiated. The Court emphasized that the appeal was not warranted, as no larger legal questions needed to be addressed in the circumstances of the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2014 08:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=366534" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (10) TMI 184 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252050</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, stating that no substantial question of law arose in the case. They found that the assessing officer&#039;s actions were premature, and the issue of benefit accrual due to demutualization was not substantiated. The Court emphasized that the appeal was not warranted, as no larger legal questions needed to be addressed in the circumstances of the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252050</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>