<?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>2017 (11) TMI 590 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350711</link>
    <description>The appeal was dismissed because the issue raised was already governed by an earlier Supreme Court decision, and the doctrine of binding precedent left no fresh legal controversy for adjudication. After leave to appeal had been granted, the Court applied stare decisis and treated the departmental challenge as covered by its prior ruling in the same line of authority, so the appeal could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Nov 2017 10:24:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=495494" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 590 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350711</link>
      <description>The appeal was dismissed because the issue raised was already governed by an earlier Supreme Court decision, and the doctrine of binding precedent left no fresh legal controversy for adjudication. After leave to appeal had been granted, the Court applied stare decisis and treated the departmental challenge as covered by its prior ruling in the same line of authority, so the appeal could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350711</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>