<?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>Court Rules Parties in Loan Licensee Arrangement Not Related for Differential Duty Demand.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=33545</link>
    <description>Demand of differential duty - parties are related or not - loan licencee arrangement - the petitioners are not concerned whether M/s. Boots makes a loss or profit in the onward sale of Betonin. They are not holding and subsidiary company - The foundation being totally weak and unsustainable in law - HC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Mar 2017 07:56:42 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Mar 2017 07:56:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=460093" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Court Rules Parties in Loan Licensee Arrangement Not Related for Differential Duty Demand.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=33545</link>
      <description>Demand of differential duty - parties are related or not - loan licencee arrangement - the petitioners are not concerned whether M/s. Boots makes a loss or profit in the onward sale of Betonin. They are not holding and subsidiary company - The foundation being totally weak and unsustainable in law - HC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Mar 2017 07:56:42 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=33545</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>