<?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 (11) TMI 11 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387762</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision regarding the interpretation of Section 106(2A) of the Finance Act, 2013 and the acceptance of declarations under the VCES scheme. The Court found no substantial difference in facts or law from previous cases, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The judgment emphasized the importance of consistent application of law and reiterated decisions made in similar cases, ultimately rejecting the Revenue&#039;s challenges.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Nov 2019 21:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=592618" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (11) TMI 11 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387762</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision regarding the interpretation of Section 106(2A) of the Finance Act, 2013 and the acceptance of declarations under the VCES scheme. The Court found no substantial difference in facts or law from previous cases, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The judgment emphasized the importance of consistent application of law and reiterated decisions made in similar cases, ultimately rejecting the Revenue&#039;s challenges.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387762</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>