<?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 (12) TMI 1048 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402249</link>
    <description>A GST penalty order was challenged in writ proceedings, but the HC held that an effective statutory appellate remedy was available. As there was no jurisdictional infirmity or breach of natural justice in the impugned order, the Court declined to interfere under writ jurisdiction. The petition was therefore not maintainable on merits and was dismissed, with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2025 14:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=631367" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (12) TMI 1048 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402249</link>
      <description>A GST penalty order was challenged in writ proceedings, but the HC held that an effective statutory appellate remedy was available. As there was no jurisdictional infirmity or breach of natural justice in the impugned order, the Court declined to interfere under writ jurisdiction. The petition was therefore not maintainable on merits and was dismissed, with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402249</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>