<?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>2024 (11) TMI 1538 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464544</link>
    <description>Rule 5(1) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 was challenged as ultra vires and unlawful, but the Madras HC treated the issue as covered by the Delhi High Court decision affirmed by the Supreme Court. Applying that binding precedent, the Court followed the existing line of authority and rejected any fresh reconsideration of the rule&#039;s validity. The writ petitions were accordingly disposed of in line with the precedent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2025 20:06:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=862314" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 1538 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464544</link>
      <description>Rule 5(1) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 was challenged as ultra vires and unlawful, but the Madras HC treated the issue as covered by the Delhi High Court decision affirmed by the Supreme Court. Applying that binding precedent, the Court followed the existing line of authority and rejected any fresh reconsideration of the rule&#039;s validity. The writ petitions were accordingly disposed of in line with the precedent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464544</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>