<?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>2021 (4) TMI 1246 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296560</link>
    <description>The High Court condoned the delay in filing the revision petition and disposed of the interlocutory application accordingly. It then admitted the revision petition for hearing on the existing paper books and requisitioned records. The Court also framed a question of law on whether the goods sold are HDPE Bags or HDPE Woven Sacks and the consequential tax rate of 4% or 8%, which was to govern the final hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2021 08:48:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=650818" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (4) TMI 1246 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296560</link>
      <description>The High Court condoned the delay in filing the revision petition and disposed of the interlocutory application accordingly. It then admitted the revision petition for hearing on the existing paper books and requisitioned records. The Court also framed a question of law on whether the goods sold are HDPE Bags or HDPE Woven Sacks and the consequential tax rate of 4% or 8%, which was to govern the final hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296560</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>