<?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 1227 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293483</link>
    <description>A writ petition challenging a rectification order under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 was held not entertainable because the petitioner had an alternative statutory revisional remedy, including power to condone delay. As that remedy was not pursued and no acceptable explanation was given for bypassing the statutory process, the HC declined to exercise discretionary writ jurisdiction to examine the revenue dispute on merits. The petition was therefore dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2021 09:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=636089" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (10) TMI 1227 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293483</link>
      <description>A writ petition challenging a rectification order under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 was held not entertainable because the petitioner had an alternative statutory revisional remedy, including power to condone delay. As that remedy was not pursued and no acceptable explanation was given for bypassing the statutory process, the HC declined to exercise discretionary writ jurisdiction to examine the revenue dispute on merits. The petition was therefore dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293483</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>