<?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>2017 (4) TMI 697 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341727</link>
    <description>The Court declined to intervene in the case due to the expired appeal period and the presence of evidence contradicting the alleged violation of natural justice. The judge ruled that payments made by the petitioner should be adjusted towards the service tax liability, with only the remaining balance subject to recovery.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Apr 2017 08:03:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=465985" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 697 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341727</link>
      <description>The Court declined to intervene in the case due to the expired appeal period and the presence of evidence contradicting the alleged violation of natural justice. The judge ruled that payments made by the petitioner should be adjusted towards the service tax liability, with only the remaining balance subject to recovery.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341727</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>