<?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>2015 (8) TMI 446 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262529</link>
    <description>A sales tax authority cannot be directed in writ jurisdiction to investigate alleged unfair trade practices or discount sales by medical retailers when the grievance falls outside the proper scope of sales tax enquiry. The appropriate mechanism for such complaints lies under the Competition Act, 2002, or another available redressal forum. Writ relief was therefore declined, and the complainant was left to pursue the alternate remedy.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2015 06:55:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=393076" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 446 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262529</link>
      <description>A sales tax authority cannot be directed in writ jurisdiction to investigate alleged unfair trade practices or discount sales by medical retailers when the grievance falls outside the proper scope of sales tax enquiry. The appropriate mechanism for such complaints lies under the Competition Act, 2002, or another available redressal forum. Writ relief was therefore declined, and the complainant was left to pursue the alternate remedy.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262529</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>