<?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>2021 (5) TMI 287 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407408</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the Order in Original, emphasizing the availability of an alternative remedy through appeal under the Finance Act, 1994. The court refrained from deciding on the discharge of liability, allowing the petitioner to seek redress through proper legal channels.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 May 2021 17:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=643868" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (5) TMI 287 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407408</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the Order in Original, emphasizing the availability of an alternative remedy through appeal under the Finance Act, 1994. The court refrained from deciding on the discharge of liability, allowing the petitioner to seek redress through proper legal channels.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407408</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>