<?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>2009 (7) TMI 13 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34174</link>
    <description>The High Court of Bombay ruled in favor of discharging the rule in a case where the petitioner sought installment payments despite the Settlement Commission&#039;s order not permitting it. The court held that the current legislation does not allow for installments, and it should not interfere with the Commission&#039;s final decision. The judgment, delivered by Ferdino I. Rebello and J.H. Bhatia, JJ., found no merit in the petitioner&#039;s argument and did not order any costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72801" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (7) TMI 13 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34174</link>
      <description>The High Court of Bombay ruled in favor of discharging the rule in a case where the petitioner sought installment payments despite the Settlement Commission&#039;s order not permitting it. The court held that the current legislation does not allow for installments, and it should not interfere with the Commission&#039;s final decision. The judgment, delivered by Ferdino I. Rebello and J.H. Bhatia, JJ., found no merit in the petitioner&#039;s argument and did not order any costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34174</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>