<?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 909 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421243</link>
    <description>The Court declined to stay penalty proceedings despite the petitioner&#039;s appeal against a tax liability, emphasizing the need to comply with statutory timelines and lack of a stay order. The Court highlighted the importance of adhering to the law, rejected the application for stay, and left open the option for the petitioner to address coercive actions through legal channels post penalty proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2022 17:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=676567" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (4) TMI 909 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421243</link>
      <description>The Court declined to stay penalty proceedings despite the petitioner&#039;s appeal against a tax liability, emphasizing the need to comply with statutory timelines and lack of a stay order. The Court highlighted the importance of adhering to the law, rejected the application for stay, and left open the option for the petitioner to address coercive actions through legal channels post penalty proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421243</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>