https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287686 The Tribunal was justified in treating the controversy as covered by the earlier decision in Suvidhe Limited v. Union of India. The Bombay High Court agreed that the prior precedent governed the issue and, once that conclusion was accepted, held that no substantial question of law arose for consideration. As the matter was fully covered by binding precedent, the Court declined any further legal re-examination and rejected the appeal. en-us Wed, 27 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Apr 2020 11:48:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287686 The Tribunal was justified in treating the controversy as covered by the earlier decision in Suvidhe Limited v. Union of India. The Bombay High Court agreed that the prior precedent governed the issue and, once that conclusion was accepted, held that no substantial question of law arose for consideration. As the matter was fully covered by binding precedent, the Court declined any further legal re-examination and rejected the appeal. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 27 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287686