<?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>1986 (3) TMI 322 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155120</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the writ petitions, stating that the orders directing payment of disputed tax in instalments were not arbitrary. It emphasized following Supreme Court principles on interim orders in revenue matters and exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 cautiously. The court found no exceptional circumstances warranting interference with the Appellate Assistant Commissioner&#039;s orders.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Mar 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Aug 2013 15:30:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=172151" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (3) TMI 322 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155120</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the writ petitions, stating that the orders directing payment of disputed tax in instalments were not arbitrary. It emphasized following Supreme Court principles on interim orders in revenue matters and exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 cautiously. The court found no exceptional circumstances warranting interference with the Appellate Assistant Commissioner&#039;s orders.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Mar 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155120</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>