<?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>2025 (7) TMI 2006 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468351</link>
    <description>Petitions raising issues stated to be similar to, if not identical with, those decided in an earlier writ petition were allowed by the Bombay HC by following the co-ordinate Bench decision in M/s. Sundyne Pumps and Compressors India Pvt. Ltd. The respondent did not dispute that the controversy was covered by that earlier ruling, and the court applied the same reasoning to the present matters. Rule was therefore made absolute in terms of the stated prayer clauses.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2026 15:09:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=899146" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 2006 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468351</link>
      <description>Petitions raising issues stated to be similar to, if not identical with, those decided in an earlier writ petition were allowed by the Bombay HC by following the co-ordinate Bench decision in M/s. Sundyne Pumps and Compressors India Pvt. Ltd. The respondent did not dispute that the controversy was covered by that earlier ruling, and the court applied the same reasoning to the present matters. Rule was therefore made absolute in terms of the stated prayer clauses.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468351</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>