<?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>2008 (8) TMI 896 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174168</link>
    <description>Where the appellate authority and tribunal found no proof of collusion between the supplier and the assessee, the High Court held that the appeals were not entertainable in view of the binding Supreme Court precedent in Commissioner of Central Excise v. Lajya Dyeing &amp; Bleaching Works. Applying that authority, the Court concluded that, absent proof of collusion, no further adjudication on the merits was warranted and the appeals had to be rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Jan 2018 13:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=399527" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 896 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174168</link>
      <description>Where the appellate authority and tribunal found no proof of collusion between the supplier and the assessee, the High Court held that the appeals were not entertainable in view of the binding Supreme Court precedent in Commissioner of Central Excise v. Lajya Dyeing &amp; Bleaching Works. Applying that authority, the Court concluded that, absent proof of collusion, no further adjudication on the merits was warranted and the appeals had to be rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174168</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>