<?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>2020 (2) TMI 630 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392186</link>
    <description>The High Court of Calcutta dismissed the appeal concerning service tax liability due to lack of jurisdiction under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The court held that the appeal involved questions related to the rate of duty or the value of goods, falling under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as per Section 35L(1b) of the Act. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed on grounds of maintainability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Feb 2020 08:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=603990" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 630 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392186</link>
      <description>The High Court of Calcutta dismissed the appeal concerning service tax liability due to lack of jurisdiction under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The court held that the appeal involved questions related to the rate of duty or the value of goods, falling under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as per Section 35L(1b) of the Act. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed on grounds of maintainability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392186</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>