<?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 (9) TMI 989 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428044</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging a GST assessment order. The petitioner failed to demonstrate jurisdictional errors or violations of natural justice by the Assistant Commissioner. The court held that certiorari jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be invoked for mere procedural or factual errors, and no gross injustice was established to warrant judicial intervention.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Apr 2025 13:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=691454" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 989 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428044</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging a GST assessment order. The petitioner failed to demonstrate jurisdictional errors or violations of natural justice by the Assistant Commissioner. The court held that certiorari jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be invoked for mere procedural or factual errors, and no gross injustice was established to warrant judicial intervention.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428044</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>