<?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>1996 (8) TMI 475 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158595</link>
    <description>A writ petition should not be entertained where an efficacious statutory appeal remedy is available and the appellate authority can examine all contentions raised. Since the impugned assessment order was appealable under the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, the writ court declined to exercise jurisdiction. The single Judge should not have entertained the petition, and the assessee was relegated to the statutory appellate remedy.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Nov 2013 13:10:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=334159" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (8) TMI 475 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158595</link>
      <description>A writ petition should not be entertained where an efficacious statutory appeal remedy is available and the appellate authority can examine all contentions raised. Since the impugned assessment order was appealable under the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, the writ court declined to exercise jurisdiction. The single Judge should not have entertained the petition, and the assessee was relegated to the statutory appellate remedy.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158595</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>