<?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 (6) TMI 1237 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273739</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the requirement for the appellant to remit 15% of the disputed demand as a condition for stay, dismissing the appeal against this order. An additional 8-week period was granted for the appellant to satisfy the remaining balance due, considering financial constraints. The appeals were disposed of with this decision, affirming the judgment of the learned Single Judge.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2018 21:59:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=526583" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (6) TMI 1237 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273739</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the requirement for the appellant to remit 15% of the disputed demand as a condition for stay, dismissing the appeal against this order. An additional 8-week period was granted for the appellant to satisfy the remaining balance due, considering financial constraints. The appeals were disposed of with this decision, affirming the judgment of the learned Single Judge.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273739</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>