<?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>2022 (4) TMI 826 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421160</link>
    <description>Regulation 16(1) of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Regulations, 1989 was confined to interim relief during the pendency of proceedings before the Tribunal and could not be used as a basis for final quashing of an order of the Revisional Board. The substantive remedy for an aggrieved person lay under Section 8 of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987, which confers jurisdiction to challenge orders passed under the relevant State Act. A contrary reading would extend the regulation beyond the parent Act and the rule-making power. The miscellaneous application was therefore not maintainable, and the Tribunal&#039;s leave to file it, along with the application itself, was set aside and dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2022 08:53:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=676409" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (4) TMI 826 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421160</link>
      <description>Regulation 16(1) of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Regulations, 1989 was confined to interim relief during the pendency of proceedings before the Tribunal and could not be used as a basis for final quashing of an order of the Revisional Board. The substantive remedy for an aggrieved person lay under Section 8 of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987, which confers jurisdiction to challenge orders passed under the relevant State Act. A contrary reading would extend the regulation beyond the parent Act and the rule-making power. The miscellaneous application was therefore not maintainable, and the Tribunal&#039;s leave to file it, along with the application itself, was set aside and dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421160</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>