<?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>1964 (10) TMI 43 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99884</link>
    <description>Constructive res judicata applies to writ proceedings under Article 226 where the same assessment order is challenged again between the same parties on grounds that could have been raised earlier. The Court held that the doctrine is grounded in public policy and finality of judgments, and that its application is not excluded merely because the later challenge is framed as a constitutional writ. A successive petition attacking the same order for the same period would permit repeated litigation and undermine the binding effect of the earlier decision. The second writ petition was therefore barred and the challenge was not maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Dec 2013 15:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136936" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1964 (10) TMI 43 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99884</link>
      <description>Constructive res judicata applies to writ proceedings under Article 226 where the same assessment order is challenged again between the same parties on grounds that could have been raised earlier. The Court held that the doctrine is grounded in public policy and finality of judgments, and that its application is not excluded merely because the later challenge is framed as a constitutional writ. A successive petition attacking the same order for the same period would permit repeated litigation and undermine the binding effect of the earlier decision. The second writ petition was therefore barred and the challenge was not maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99884</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>