<?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 1574 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313207</link>
    <description>The writ challenge to a Tribunal order was found not maintainable because an effective alternative statutory remedy of appeal was available under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The availability of that appeal remedy displaced writ jurisdiction, and the petition was therefore rejected on maintainability grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2024 19:15:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=748609" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 1574 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313207</link>
      <description>The writ challenge to a Tribunal order was found not maintainable because an effective alternative statutory remedy of appeal was available under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The availability of that appeal remedy displaced writ jurisdiction, and the petition was therefore rejected on maintainability grounds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313207</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>