<?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>2022 (9) TMI 1006 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428061</link>
    <description>The court quashed the demand notice dated 20.10.2021 as it was found unsustainable due to the retrospective effect of the amendments made by Notifications No. 18/2016-ST and No. 34/2016-ST, which reinstated the Reverse Charge Mechanism for Senior Advocates. The demand notice was set aside, and the writ petition was allowed on this basis, with other prayers not addressed in detail.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Jul 2023 13:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=691523" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 1006 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428061</link>
      <description>The court quashed the demand notice dated 20.10.2021 as it was found unsustainable due to the retrospective effect of the amendments made by Notifications No. 18/2016-ST and No. 34/2016-ST, which reinstated the Reverse Charge Mechanism for Senior Advocates. The demand notice was set aside, and the writ petition was allowed on this basis, with other prayers not addressed in detail.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428061</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>