<?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>2024 (2) TMI 900 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449749</link>
    <description>HC dismissed writ petition challenging tax assessment order, ruling that Article 226 jurisdiction is not an appellate remedy. The court emphasized following statutory appeal procedures under CGST/SGST Act and exploring alternative legal remedies. Petitioner was directed to pursue appropriate challenge mechanisms as prescribed by law, with writ petition being found procedurally improper.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 18:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=744085" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 900 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449749</link>
      <description>HC dismissed writ petition challenging tax assessment order, ruling that Article 226 jurisdiction is not an appellate remedy. The court emphasized following statutory appeal procedures under CGST/SGST Act and exploring alternative legal remedies. Petitioner was directed to pursue appropriate challenge mechanisms as prescribed by law, with writ petition being found procedurally improper.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449749</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>