<?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>2013 (2) TMI 275 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220870</link>
    <description>The court upheld the revisional authority&#039;s decision to include turnover from the supply of ballast in the assessment under Section 7(7) of the KGST Act. The petitioner&#039;s challenge to the validity of the assessment orders passed afresh was dismissed, emphasizing the need to first invalidate the revisional orders. The court directed the Tribunal to consider the petitioner&#039;s delay petitions and expedite the appeal process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2013 10:16:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=194231" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (2) TMI 275 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220870</link>
      <description>The court upheld the revisional authority&#039;s decision to include turnover from the supply of ballast in the assessment under Section 7(7) of the KGST Act. The petitioner&#039;s challenge to the validity of the assessment orders passed afresh was dismissed, emphasizing the need to first invalidate the revisional orders. The court directed the Tribunal to consider the petitioner&#039;s delay petitions and expedite the appeal process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220870</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>