<?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>2019 (10) TMI 23 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386539</link>
    <description>The court decided to relegate the petitioner to pursue the appeal before the 2nd respondent, condoning the delay in filing appeals and directing a quick decision. No coercive steps were to be taken as the due amount had been recovered. The petitioner could operate the Corporation Bank account during the appeal, unaffected by the prohibitory order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Oct 2019 09:50:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=589330" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (10) TMI 23 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386539</link>
      <description>The court decided to relegate the petitioner to pursue the appeal before the 2nd respondent, condoning the delay in filing appeals and directing a quick decision. No coercive steps were to be taken as the due amount had been recovered. The petitioner could operate the Corporation Bank account during the appeal, unaffected by the prohibitory order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386539</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>