<?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 (7) TMI 306 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329708</link>
    <description>The court partially allowed the writ petition, setting aside the findings on income from SEZ and remanding the matter to the Settlement Commissioner for fresh consideration. The Settlement Commissioner was directed to provide a personal hearing to the petitioner and decide the issue in line with statutory provisions. The findings on other issues were confirmed, allowing settlement based on those determinations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Nov 2016 16:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=434221" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 306 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329708</link>
      <description>The court partially allowed the writ petition, setting aside the findings on income from SEZ and remanding the matter to the Settlement Commissioner for fresh consideration. The Settlement Commissioner was directed to provide a personal hearing to the petitioner and decide the issue in line with statutory provisions. The findings on other issues were confirmed, allowing settlement based on those determinations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329708</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>