<?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>2011 (3) TMI 1600 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174750</link>
    <description>Interim protection was continued pending disposal of the statutory appeal because the petitioner had already deposited 50% of the disputed tax, the garnishee order had been withdrawn, and the appellate authority had heard the appeal. In those circumstances, continuation of the earlier interim order was considered appropriate until the appeal was decided.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2015 11:01:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=402273" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 1600 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174750</link>
      <description>Interim protection was continued pending disposal of the statutory appeal because the petitioner had already deposited 50% of the disputed tax, the garnishee order had been withdrawn, and the appellate authority had heard the appeal. In those circumstances, continuation of the earlier interim order was considered appropriate until the appeal was decided.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174750</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>