<?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>2019 (5) TMI 444 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379716</link>
    <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioners, holding that the MSTT order should have prospective effect from 20/01/2015, protecting them from tax liabilities for transactions before that date. Assessment orders for 2011-12 and 2013-14 were set aside for contradicting the High Court&#039;s directions. The Court emphasized adherence to binding judgments and avoiding reopening settled issues, making the rule absolute with no costs ordered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Jul 2019 12:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=570027" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 444 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379716</link>
      <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioners, holding that the MSTT order should have prospective effect from 20/01/2015, protecting them from tax liabilities for transactions before that date. Assessment orders for 2011-12 and 2013-14 were set aside for contradicting the High Court&#039;s directions. The Court emphasized adherence to binding judgments and avoiding reopening settled issues, making the rule absolute with no costs ordered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379716</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>