<?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 (10) TMI 45 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34883</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, dismissing the writ petition and affirming the requirement for a pre-deposit while staying the balance demand. The Court emphasized the importance of following legal principles and the discretionary nature of interim relief in tax cases. The petitioner was given four weeks to comply with the deposit condition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2014 09:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73496" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (10) TMI 45 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34883</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, dismissing the writ petition and affirming the requirement for a pre-deposit while staying the balance demand. The Court emphasized the importance of following legal principles and the discretionary nature of interim relief in tax cases. The petitioner was given four weeks to comply with the deposit condition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34883</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>