<?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>2012 (9) TMI 946 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174831</link>
    <description>A writ petition challenging a pending penalty adjudication was held premature because no final order had yet been passed. The court noted that objections based on denial of cross-examination and any resulting breach of natural justice could be raised only after the adjudication concluded and the final order was made. Interference at the ongoing stage was therefore unwarranted, and the petition was not maintainable at that point.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2015 13:05:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=402942" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (9) TMI 946 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174831</link>
      <description>A writ petition challenging a pending penalty adjudication was held premature because no final order had yet been passed. The court noted that objections based on denial of cross-examination and any resulting breach of natural justice could be raised only after the adjudication concluded and the final order was made. Interference at the ongoing stage was therefore unwarranted, and the petition was not maintainable at that point.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174831</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>