https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330633 The court directed the third respondent to issue demands for subsequent periods but not enforce them until the constitutional validity of the statute in question was decided in other pending writ petitions. This approach aimed to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and allowed the petitioner to raise a plea of limitation if unsuccessful in the other writ petitions. The judgment disposed of the writ petition with this direction, emphasizing the need to await the outcome of related challenges before enforcing new demands. en-us Wed, 29 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Aug 2016 16:22:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330633 The court directed the third respondent to issue demands for subsequent periods but not enforce them until the constitutional validity of the statute in question was decided in other pending writ petitions. This approach aimed to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and allowed the petitioner to raise a plea of limitation if unsuccessful in the other writ petitions. The judgment disposed of the writ petition with this direction, emphasizing the need to await the outcome of related challenges before enforcing new demands. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 29 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330633