<?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 (3) TMI 484 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325300</link>
    <description>The Court declined to entertain the appeal from the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal order, emphasizing that since there was no revenue loss and the tax liability had been discharged entirely, further examination was unnecessary. The judgment highlighted that detailed scrutiny of rules and provisions could be reserved for cases showing revenue loss or tax evasion, opting to dispose of the appeal while leaving substantial legal questions for potential future review.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Sep 2016 13:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=420264" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 484 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325300</link>
      <description>The Court declined to entertain the appeal from the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal order, emphasizing that since there was no revenue loss and the tax liability had been discharged entirely, further examination was unnecessary. The judgment highlighted that detailed scrutiny of rules and provisions could be reserved for cases showing revenue loss or tax evasion, opting to dispose of the appeal while leaving substantial legal questions for potential future review.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325300</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>