<?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>2018 (9) TMI 1189 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367453</link>
    <description>The petitioner sought permission to submit revised returns, and the Court directed the assessing authority to consider that request in the light of the circular referred to in the writ petition. The first respondent was ordered to take a decision on the request within one month. The operative effect is a mandate for timely administrative consideration of the revised-return request under the applicable circular, rather than an immediate substantive grant of relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2018 08:22:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=535216" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 1189 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367453</link>
      <description>The petitioner sought permission to submit revised returns, and the Court directed the assessing authority to consider that request in the light of the circular referred to in the writ petition. The first respondent was ordered to take a decision on the request within one month. The operative effect is a mandate for timely administrative consideration of the revised-return request under the applicable circular, rather than an immediate substantive grant of relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367453</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>