<?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>2004 (11) TMI 547 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163397</link>
    <description>A taxing statute may require pre-deposit of at least 50 per cent of the assessed tax as a normal condition for entertaining an appeal, with only limited waiver discretion available on recorded reasons. Where that statutory requirement is upheld, appellate and revisional authorities act within mandate by insisting on compliance before hearing the appeal. The availability of statutory appeal and revision also weighs against writ intervention under article 226, because writ jurisdiction is not a substitute for the appellate scheme and will not ordinarily be used to bypass it absent gross injustice or jurisdictional error.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2014 18:32:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=350721" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (11) TMI 547 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163397</link>
      <description>A taxing statute may require pre-deposit of at least 50 per cent of the assessed tax as a normal condition for entertaining an appeal, with only limited waiver discretion available on recorded reasons. Where that statutory requirement is upheld, appellate and revisional authorities act within mandate by insisting on compliance before hearing the appeal. The availability of statutory appeal and revision also weighs against writ intervention under article 226, because writ jurisdiction is not a substitute for the appellate scheme and will not ordinarily be used to bypass it absent gross injustice or jurisdictional error.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163397</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>