<?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>1989 (7) TMI 114 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42604</link>
    <description>The HC directed the Assistant Collector to decide the refund application within three months from production of a certified copy of the order, requiring expeditious disposal of the claim. It also declined to express any opinion on the period for which tax was not required to be paid, leaving that question undecided in the present note.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Jun 2010 12:01:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=81133" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (7) TMI 114 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42604</link>
      <description>The HC directed the Assistant Collector to decide the refund application within three months from production of a certified copy of the order, requiring expeditious disposal of the claim. It also declined to express any opinion on the period for which tax was not required to be paid, leaving that question undecided in the present note.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42604</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>