<?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>2014 (10) TMI 810 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252676</link>
    <description>Writ jurisdiction should generally not be used to challenge a show-cause notice or connected assessment order at the threshold where the dispute turns on mixed questions of fact and law. Questions about contract classification and the applicable exemption fee under the VAT notification require examination of the contract terms, surrounding circumstances, and evidence, and are to be decided first by the assessing authority. Rectification proceedings under section 33 of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003 were therefore not interdicted in writ proceedings. The availability of statutory appeal and revision remedies also weighed against intervention under article 226.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2014 12:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=367781" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (10) TMI 810 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252676</link>
      <description>Writ jurisdiction should generally not be used to challenge a show-cause notice or connected assessment order at the threshold where the dispute turns on mixed questions of fact and law. Questions about contract classification and the applicable exemption fee under the VAT notification require examination of the contract terms, surrounding circumstances, and evidence, and are to be decided first by the assessing authority. Rectification proceedings under section 33 of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003 were therefore not interdicted in writ proceedings. The availability of statutory appeal and revision remedies also weighed against intervention under article 226.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252676</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>