<?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>2025 (1) TMI 1245 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765181</link>
    <description>A writ petition challenging an adjudication order under the CGST/WBGST regime was not entertained because the dispute involved several factual issues needing affidavit-based examination. The High Court treated the statutory appellate remedy as the appropriate course where disputed facts required determination, and upheld relegation of the petitioner to an appeal under Section 107. No interference with the adjudication order was called for in writ jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Jan 2025 08:40:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=792046" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (1) TMI 1245 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765181</link>
      <description>A writ petition challenging an adjudication order under the CGST/WBGST regime was not entertained because the dispute involved several factual issues needing affidavit-based examination. The High Court treated the statutory appellate remedy as the appropriate course where disputed facts required determination, and upheld relegation of the petitioner to an appeal under Section 107. No interference with the adjudication order was called for in writ jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765181</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>