<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>taxesinindia &#187; SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENTS</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/category/taxes-systems-in-india/scorders/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Jun 2010 09:09:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>SUPREME COURT ON DISMISSAL OF CASES</title>
		<link>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/24/supreme-court-on-dismissal-of-cases/</link>
		<comments>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/24/supreme-court-on-dismissal-of-cases/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 04:26:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENTS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/?p=680</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The latest ruling from the Apex Court on the need for deciding cases, which are otherwise to be dismissed for delay in filng, on merits reads as follows:- Courts ought not to dismiss cases on mere technicalities like delay in filing an appeal or a petition unless a malafide intent is apparent on the side [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/24/supreme-court-on-dismissal-of-cases/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LITIGANT ENTITLED TO KNOW REASONS FOR GRANT OR REJECTION OF HIS PRAYER</title>
		<link>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/11/litigant-entitled-to-know-reasons-for-grant-or-rejection-of-his-prayer/</link>
		<comments>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/11/litigant-entitled-to-know-reasons-for-grant-or-rejection-of-his-prayer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2010 09:15:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[administrative action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[judicial review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[proper reasning]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/11/litigant-entitled-to-know-reasons-for-grant-or-rejection-of-his-prayer/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA while remanding the case n re: ASST. COMMR. OF COMMERCIAL TAX DEPT. vs. SHUKLA &#38; BROTHERS in C.A.. No.   .3289 of 2010 on 15.4.2010, held as follows: - QUOTE: The increasing institution of cases in all Courts in India and the resultant burden upon the Courts has invited attention of all [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/11/litigant-entitled-to-know-reasons-for-grant-or-rejection-of-his-prayer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MODVAT CREDIT ON CERTAIN GOODS</title>
		<link>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/09/modvat-credit-on-certain-goods-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/09/modvat-credit-on-certain-goods-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2010 06:22:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1944]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CEX. RULES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MODVAT CREDIT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RULE 57Q]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/09/modvat-credit-on-certain-goods/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA while dismissing the appeals filed by MADRAS CEMENTS LTD vs. COMMR. OF C .EX. in Civil Appeal No. 2037 of 2006 with C.A. No.7443 of 2008 held as follows: - QUOTE: -The short point involved is these appeals is whether the Appellant/Assessee is eligible for Modvat credit on certain goods for [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/09/modvat-credit-on-certain-goods-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MODVAT CREDIT ON CERTAIN GOODS</title>
		<link>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/09/modvat-credit-on-certain-goods/</link>
		<comments>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/09/modvat-credit-on-certain-goods/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2010 06:22:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENTS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/09/modvat-credit-on-certain-goods/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA while dismissing the appeals filed by MADRAS CEMENTS LTD vs. COMMR. OF C .EX. in Civil Appeal No. 2037 of 2006 with C.A. No.7443 of 2008 held as follows: - QUOTE: -The short point involved is these appeals is whether the Appellant/Assessee is eligible for Modvat credit on certain goods for [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/09/modvat-credit-on-certain-goods/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SORRY FOR THE INTERRUPTION</title>
		<link>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/07/sorry-for-the-interruption/</link>
		<comments>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/07/sorry-for-the-interruption/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jun 2010 10:58:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENTS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/07/sorry-for-the-interruption/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DUE TO CERTAIN CALAMITIES IN MY FAMILY LIFE, I COULD NOT CONCENTRATE ON POSTING IMPORTANT LEGAL NEWS ITEMS FOR THE PAST THREE MONTHS. NOW THAT ALL SUCH WORRIS ARE OVER, I AM BAK WITH FULL ENERGY TO UPDATE THE LEGAL NEWS / JUDGEMENTS etc. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. VENKATRAMAN RAGGHUPATHY, Web admin.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/06/07/sorry-for-the-interruption/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NOT TO GO ONLY BY DICTIONARY MEANING</title>
		<link>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/02/14/not-to-go-only-by-dictionary-meaning/</link>
		<comments>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/02/14/not-to-go-only-by-dictionary-meaning/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:09:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Customs Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DICTIONARY MEANING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Excise Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[INCOME TAX ACT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PRIMA FACIE]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/02/14/not-to-go-only-by-dictionary-meaning/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA while deciding the Civil Appeal No. 786 of 2010 with C.A. Nos. 787-792 of 2010, on 20.01.10, in re: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs EMPTEE POLY-YARN PVT. LTD, observed as follows: - QUOTE: Repeatedly this Court has recommended to the Deaprtment, be it under Excise Act, Customs Act or the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/02/14/not-to-go-only-by-dictionary-meaning/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PRODUCTION &amp; MANUFACTURE</title>
		<link>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/01/17/production-manufacture/</link>
		<comments>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/01/17/production-manufacture/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Jan 2010 08:49:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[manufacture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[production section 80 IA of the Income Tax Act]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/01/17/production-manufacture/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA while deciding the Civil appeal no.8036 of 2009 with C.A.Nos. 8037-8044 of 2009, on 2.12.09, in re: INCOME TAX OFFICER, UDIAPUR vs ARIHANT TILES &#38; MARBLES (P) LTD observed as follows:- QUOTE : In the present case, we have extrated in detail the process undertaken by each of the respondents before [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2010/01/17/production-manufacture/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REJECTION OF TRANSACTION VALUE</title>
		<link>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2009/12/07/rejection-of-transaction-value/</link>
		<comments>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2009/12/07/rejection-of-transaction-value/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 06:06:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[REJECTION]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SPECIAL OR EXTRAORDINARY REASONS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transaction value]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2009/12/07/rejection-of-transaction-value/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA while deciding the Civil Appeal No. 7129 of 2002 on 23/4/08 in re: MOTOR INDUSTRIES CO. LTD vs COMMR. OF CUSTOMS, observed as follows: - QUOTE: No special or extraordinary reasons have been recorded for rejecting the transaction value. It is settled law that unless transaction value is rejected for extraordinary [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2009/12/07/rejection-of-transaction-value/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>REINSTATEMENT NOT TO MEAN FULL PAYMENT OF BACK WAGES</title>
		<link>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2009/12/03/reinstatement-not-to-mean-full-payment-of-back-wages/</link>
		<comments>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2009/12/03/reinstatement-not-to-mean-full-payment-of-back-wages/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 05:28:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DISCRETIONARY ELEMENT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FULL PAYMENT OF BACK WAGES]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[REINSTATEMENT]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2009/12/03/reinstatement-not-to-mean-full-payment-of-back-wages/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA [bench of Justices Tarun Chatterjee and Surinder Singh Nijar] held on 03.12.09 as follows: - Getting your job back after a long bitter legal battle with your employer hardly means he has to pay you the entire back wages FOR CONTRIBUTING LITTLE OR NOTHING to the establishment. Employers can decide on [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2009/12/03/reinstatement-not-to-mean-full-payment-of-back-wages/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF SEC 9D OF CESACT</title>
		<link>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2009/10/16/constitutional-validity-of-sec-9d-of-cesact-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2009/10/16/constitutional-validity-of-sec-9d-of-cesact-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:04:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENTS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[challenge the invocation of provisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[opportunity to make submissions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ultra vires]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unconstitutional]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2009/10/16/constitutional-validity-of-sec-9d-of-cesact-2/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI, while deciding on 28.8.09 the W.P.(C) Nos.1854 and 1895-1898/1992 in re: J&#38;K CIGARETTES LTD vs CCEX the conclusions were summarised as follows:- QUOTE: Thus, we summarize our conclusions as under:- (i) We are of the opinion that the provisions of Section 9D(2) of the Act are not unconstitutional or [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.taxesinindia.com/blog/2009/10/16/constitutional-validity-of-sec-9d-of-cesact-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
