<?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>2008 (8) TMI 987 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279333</link>
    <description>Concurrent findings that a Chartered Accountant&#039;s certificate was reliable for supporting a refund claim were upheld, and the High Court found no basis to disturb those factual conclusions. Because the lower authorities had accepted and relied on the certificate, the appeal raised no substantial question of law for consideration. The result was rejection of the appeal, with the factual appreciation of the certificate left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Mar 2019 14:33:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=562657" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 987 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279333</link>
      <description>Concurrent findings that a Chartered Accountant&#039;s certificate was reliable for supporting a refund claim were upheld, and the High Court found no basis to disturb those factual conclusions. Because the lower authorities had accepted and relied on the certificate, the appeal raised no substantial question of law for consideration. The result was rejection of the appeal, with the factual appreciation of the certificate left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279333</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>