<?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>2020 (8) TMI 690 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397747</link>
    <description>A statutory pre-deposit condition for admission of an appeal must be strictly complied with; it cannot be satisfied by adjusting earlier pre-deposit credit or other available credit unless the statute expressly allows it. On that basis, the appellate authority was justified in refusing to admit the appeal where no qualifying deposit was made. A writ challenge to a penalty order was also not maintainable because the statutory appeal remedy was available but was not filed within time, and the matter did not fall within any exception permitting writ jurisdiction despite an alternative remedy. Both challenges therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2020 14:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=620818" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (8) TMI 690 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397747</link>
      <description>A statutory pre-deposit condition for admission of an appeal must be strictly complied with; it cannot be satisfied by adjusting earlier pre-deposit credit or other available credit unless the statute expressly allows it. On that basis, the appellate authority was justified in refusing to admit the appeal where no qualifying deposit was made. A writ challenge to a penalty order was also not maintainable because the statutory appeal remedy was available but was not filed within time, and the matter did not fall within any exception permitting writ jurisdiction despite an alternative remedy. Both challenges therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397747</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>