<?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 (10) TMI 944 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399970</link>
    <description>A writ challenge to assessment and penalty-related orders was not entertained where the dispute raised disputed questions of fact and an efficacious statutory appeal was available. The court noted that the assessment materials had been considered and that no violation of natural justice was shown. On that basis, it declined to examine the merits in writ jurisdiction and left the petitioner to pursue the appellate remedy under the statute.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:28:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=626009" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (10) TMI 944 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399970</link>
      <description>A writ challenge to assessment and penalty-related orders was not entertained where the dispute raised disputed questions of fact and an efficacious statutory appeal was available. The court noted that the assessment materials had been considered and that no violation of natural justice was shown. On that basis, it declined to examine the merits in writ jurisdiction and left the petitioner to pursue the appellate remedy under the statute.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399970</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>