<?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>2008 (12) TMI 12 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31806</link>
    <description>The High Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the appeals to the Tribunal for a fresh consideration on whether the licence fee payable to the railways should be treated as an accrued or contingent liability. The Court emphasized the need for the Tribunal to follow its previous decision unless there was an appeal by the revenue, directing the Tribunal to examine the appeal status. The matters were scheduled to be placed before the Tribunal for further directions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2011 16:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70452" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (12) TMI 12 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31806</link>
      <description>The High Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the appeals to the Tribunal for a fresh consideration on whether the licence fee payable to the railways should be treated as an accrued or contingent liability. The Court emphasized the need for the Tribunal to follow its previous decision unless there was an appeal by the revenue, directing the Tribunal to examine the appeal status. The matters were scheduled to be placed before the Tribunal for further directions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31806</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>