<?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 (6) TMI 654 - JAMMU &amp; KASHMIR HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423813</link>
    <description>A writ petition was treated as unsustainable where the statute provided a specific post-appeal remedy before the Tribunal for reference of questions of law to the High Court, and that statutory course had not been pursued before invoking writ jurisdiction. The article explains that bypassing an effective alternative remedy defeats maintainability under writ principles. It also notes that the time spent in the present proceedings should be excluded while computing limitation for moving the Tribunal, allowing the party to pursue the statutory remedy within the permitted period. No view was expressed on the merits of the questions proposed to be raised.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2022 13:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=682085" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (6) TMI 654 - JAMMU &amp; KASHMIR HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423813</link>
      <description>A writ petition was treated as unsustainable where the statute provided a specific post-appeal remedy before the Tribunal for reference of questions of law to the High Court, and that statutory course had not been pursued before invoking writ jurisdiction. The article explains that bypassing an effective alternative remedy defeats maintainability under writ principles. It also notes that the time spent in the present proceedings should be excluded while computing limitation for moving the Tribunal, allowing the party to pursue the statutory remedy within the permitted period. No view was expressed on the merits of the questions proposed to be raised.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423813</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>