<?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 (8) TMI 1868 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=471645</link>
    <description>Coordinate-bench precedent governed proceedings that stood on the same footing as earlier similarly situated matters. The impugned appellate order and order-in-original required the same treatment prescribed by that precedent, resulting in their quashing in favour of the assessee. The legal focus is the consistent application of a binding coordinate-bench ruling where the relevant controversy is directly covered and no material distinction is identified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2026 19:04:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=922453" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (8) TMI 1868 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=471645</link>
      <description>Coordinate-bench precedent governed proceedings that stood on the same footing as earlier similarly situated matters. The impugned appellate order and order-in-original required the same treatment prescribed by that precedent, resulting in their quashing in favour of the assessee. The legal focus is the consistent application of a binding coordinate-bench ruling where the relevant controversy is directly covered and no material distinction is identified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=471645</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>