<?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>1994 (10) TMI 277 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158017</link>
    <description>The Court upheld the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s conditional stay order in a case involving an exporter of cashew kernels seeking to quash the order and halt tax collection for specific years. The Court determined that the Tribunal&#039;s order was not arbitrary or mechanical but a result of proper consideration, within its jurisdiction, and compliant with relevant rules. The petitioner&#039;s plea to modify the stay order was not addressed in the writ petition, with the Court advising separate pursuit before the Tribunal. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition, finding no grounds for constitutional jurisdiction invocation under articles 226 and 227.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Oct 2013 12:40:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=328237" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (10) TMI 277 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158017</link>
      <description>The Court upheld the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s conditional stay order in a case involving an exporter of cashew kernels seeking to quash the order and halt tax collection for specific years. The Court determined that the Tribunal&#039;s order was not arbitrary or mechanical but a result of proper consideration, within its jurisdiction, and compliant with relevant rules. The petitioner&#039;s plea to modify the stay order was not addressed in the writ petition, with the Court advising separate pursuit before the Tribunal. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition, finding no grounds for constitutional jurisdiction invocation under articles 226 and 227.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158017</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>