<?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>1998 (1) TMI 500 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159634</link>
    <description>Writ relief under Article 226 is unavailable where an adequate statutory appeal and revision mechanism exists, especially when the dispute turns on disputed facts. The High Court noted that assessability of gunny bags as packing material depends on factual inquiry into whether there was an express or implied agreement to sell the packing material and whether the transaction was a composite sale. Because the assessing authority had recorded findings after show-cause proceedings, the court declined to examine the taxability on merits and left the issue to the statutory adjudicatory process. The petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was relegated to the available remedies under the Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2013 16:09:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=337466" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (1) TMI 500 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159634</link>
      <description>Writ relief under Article 226 is unavailable where an adequate statutory appeal and revision mechanism exists, especially when the dispute turns on disputed facts. The High Court noted that assessability of gunny bags as packing material depends on factual inquiry into whether there was an express or implied agreement to sell the packing material and whether the transaction was a composite sale. Because the assessing authority had recorded findings after show-cause proceedings, the court declined to examine the taxability on merits and left the issue to the statutory adjudicatory process. The petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was relegated to the available remedies under the Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=159634</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>