<?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>2000 (11) TMI 134 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40291</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court found the assessee&#039;s contentions without merit because the dispute was already covered by binding precedent followed by the High Court, and it saw no reason to depart from that earlier decision. Applying the precedent&#039;s binding effect to the facts before it, the Court upheld the High Court&#039;s approach and dismissed the appeals with costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Aug 2018 13:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=78833" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (11) TMI 134 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40291</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court found the assessee&#039;s contentions without merit because the dispute was already covered by binding precedent followed by the High Court, and it saw no reason to depart from that earlier decision. Applying the precedent&#039;s binding effect to the facts before it, the Court upheld the High Court&#039;s approach and dismissed the appeals with costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40291</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>