<?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>2013 (2) TMI 652 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167790</link>
    <description>Recovery of disputed tax and penalty by garnishee proceedings was held premature where revisions seeking stay were still pending, because enforcing recovery during that pendency would render the statutory challenge ineffective. The administrative circular invoked for recovery was found to lack statutory basis, so the garnishee action was treated as improper and set aside. Non-speaking orders rejecting stay applications in the first appeal were also disapproved, since reasoned consideration was required for applications directly affecting recovery; those orders were set aside and fresh reasoned orders were directed within a fixed time.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 May 2016 11:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=372898" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (2) TMI 652 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167790</link>
      <description>Recovery of disputed tax and penalty by garnishee proceedings was held premature where revisions seeking stay were still pending, because enforcing recovery during that pendency would render the statutory challenge ineffective. The administrative circular invoked for recovery was found to lack statutory basis, so the garnishee action was treated as improper and set aside. Non-speaking orders rejecting stay applications in the first appeal were also disapproved, since reasoned consideration was required for applications directly affecting recovery; those orders were set aside and fresh reasoned orders were directed within a fixed time.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167790</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>