<?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>2016 (2) TMI 19 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271314</link>
    <description>Where an adjudicatory order does not properly examine the statutory framework governing CENVAT credit reversal and service tax on exempted and taxable services, the matter may be remitted for fresh consideration. If both sides agree to reconsideration, the original authority should hear the parties afresh and decide on merits. The substantial questions of law are left open until that fresh determination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 May 2016 11:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=415045" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 19 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271314</link>
      <description>Where an adjudicatory order does not properly examine the statutory framework governing CENVAT credit reversal and service tax on exempted and taxable services, the matter may be remitted for fresh consideration. If both sides agree to reconsideration, the original authority should hear the parties afresh and decide on merits. The substantial questions of law are left open until that fresh determination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271314</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>