<?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>2010 (3) TMI 734 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203818</link>
    <description>The High Court summarily dismissed the appellant&#039;s appeal against the Single Judge&#039;s decision regarding a contractual matter. The appellant&#039;s bid for a tax collection contract, seeking a rate reduction due to referencing errors, was rejected by the Single Judge. The court upheld the dismissal, citing the appellant&#039;s failure to note prevailing rates and deemed the attempt to back out of the contract as unjustified. Allegations of misleading conduct by the respondents were dismissed, and the court upheld the forfeiture of the deposited amount, finding no grounds for intervention in favor of the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 May 2014 15:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177369" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (3) TMI 734 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203818</link>
      <description>The High Court summarily dismissed the appellant&#039;s appeal against the Single Judge&#039;s decision regarding a contractual matter. The appellant&#039;s bid for a tax collection contract, seeking a rate reduction due to referencing errors, was rejected by the Single Judge. The court upheld the dismissal, citing the appellant&#039;s failure to note prevailing rates and deemed the attempt to back out of the contract as unjustified. Allegations of misleading conduct by the respondents were dismissed, and the court upheld the forfeiture of the deposited amount, finding no grounds for intervention in favor of the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203818</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>