<?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 (11) TMI 980 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334962</link>
    <description>Trade discount allowed through credit notes could not be disallowed merely because it was not reflected in the sale invoice, where the record otherwise established the discount. The HC treated the issue as covered by binding Supreme Court authority and held that rejection of the claim on that sole ground was legally unsustainable. The earlier rejection orders were set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with the governing law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2016 11:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=448969" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 980 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334962</link>
      <description>Trade discount allowed through credit notes could not be disallowed merely because it was not reflected in the sale invoice, where the record otherwise established the discount. The HC treated the issue as covered by binding Supreme Court authority and held that rejection of the claim on that sole ground was legally unsustainable. The earlier rejection orders were set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with the governing law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334962</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>