<?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 (6) TMI 344 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161141</link>
    <description>The writ jurisdiction was declined where an efficacious statutory appeal was available against the revisional order, especially as the dispute involved factual issues better examined in appeal. The court reiterated that the alternative-remedy rule is a self-imposed restraint, subject to exceptions for breach of natural justice or lack of efficacy. Although the revisional authority had proceeded ex parte after multiple adjournments, the court held that the grievance over refusal of further time could still be considered by the appellate authority. The petitioner was therefore relegated to the statutory appeal, with liberty to seek condonation of delay and interim protection against recovery.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Jan 2014 16:40:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=341989" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (6) TMI 344 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161141</link>
      <description>The writ jurisdiction was declined where an efficacious statutory appeal was available against the revisional order, especially as the dispute involved factual issues better examined in appeal. The court reiterated that the alternative-remedy rule is a self-imposed restraint, subject to exceptions for breach of natural justice or lack of efficacy. Although the revisional authority had proceeded ex parte after multiple adjournments, the court held that the grievance over refusal of further time could still be considered by the appellate authority. The petitioner was therefore relegated to the statutory appeal, with liberty to seek condonation of delay and interim protection against recovery.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161141</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>