<?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 (3) TMI 1692 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285089</link>
    <description>Limitation objections to a proposed assessment were not examined on the merits in the writ proceedings, although the petitioner had raised additional grounds on limitation. The earlier dismissal rested on a prior common judgment, but the record showed that these specific objections remained unconsidered. The HC therefore set aside the impugned judgment and restored the writ petition for limited reconsideration by the Single Bench on the limitation challenge to the assessment proposal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2025 17:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=598441" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 1692 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285089</link>
      <description>Limitation objections to a proposed assessment were not examined on the merits in the writ proceedings, although the petitioner had raised additional grounds on limitation. The earlier dismissal rested on a prior common judgment, but the record showed that these specific objections remained unconsidered. The HC therefore set aside the impugned judgment and restored the writ petition for limited reconsideration by the Single Bench on the limitation challenge to the assessment proposal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285089</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>