<?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 (9) TMI 90 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31864</link>
    <description>Where the Revenue had accepted an earlier Tribunal ruling on the same small scale industry exemption issue and that ruling had attained finality, it could not later contest the identical question against another assessee on the same footing. The settled position bound the Revenue in subsequent proceedings, and the assessee remained entitled to the exemption benefit. A later amendment deleting the relevant condition did not affect the basis on which the matter was disposed of.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70510" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (9) TMI 90 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31864</link>
      <description>Where the Revenue had accepted an earlier Tribunal ruling on the same small scale industry exemption issue and that ruling had attained finality, it could not later contest the identical question against another assessee on the same footing. The settled position bound the Revenue in subsequent proceedings, and the assessee remained entitled to the exemption benefit. A later amendment deleting the relevant condition did not affect the basis on which the matter was disposed of.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31864</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>