<?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>2016 (1) TMI 5 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270213</link>
    <description>Where the impugned assessment order was appealable under the statutory scheme, writ jurisdiction was not entertained at that stage because the petitioners had an adequate alternative appellate remedy. The High Court therefore declined to examine the writ petitions on merits and directed the petitioners to pursue the prescribed appeal instead.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Jan 2016 11:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=411394" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 5 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270213</link>
      <description>Where the impugned assessment order was appealable under the statutory scheme, writ jurisdiction was not entertained at that stage because the petitioners had an adequate alternative appellate remedy. The High Court therefore declined to examine the writ petitions on merits and directed the petitioners to pursue the prescribed appeal instead.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270213</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>