<?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>2023 (6) TMI 290 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438716</link>
    <description>HC examined the constitutionality of sections 13(8)(b) and 8(2) of IGST Act. Initial conflicting judicial opinions led to reference to third judge. After detailed review, Division Bench ultimately held the contested provisions legal and constitutional. Petitions challenging the statutory provisions were dismissed, maintaining the legislative framework&#039;s validity with certain interpretative limitations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2025 11:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=715787" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (6) TMI 290 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438716</link>
      <description>HC examined the constitutionality of sections 13(8)(b) and 8(2) of IGST Act. Initial conflicting judicial opinions led to reference to third judge. After detailed review, Division Bench ultimately held the contested provisions legal and constitutional. Petitions challenging the statutory provisions were dismissed, maintaining the legislative framework&#039;s validity with certain interpretative limitations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438716</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>