<?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 (2) TMI 65 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765519</link>
    <description>A writ challenge to a single show cause notice covering two financial years was declined because an alternative and efficacious appellate remedy was available. The petitioner argued that separate notices should have been issued for different assessment years, but the court noted the existence of the appellate mechanism and the fact that the impugned notice covered two financial years in one proceeding. The writ petition was therefore not entertained and was dismissed, with liberty to pursue the appellate remedy.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2025 14:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=794100" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (2) TMI 65 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765519</link>
      <description>A writ challenge to a single show cause notice covering two financial years was declined because an alternative and efficacious appellate remedy was available. The petitioner argued that separate notices should have been issued for different assessment years, but the court noted the existence of the appellate mechanism and the fact that the impugned notice covered two financial years in one proceeding. The writ petition was therefore not entertained and was dismissed, with liberty to pursue the appellate remedy.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765519</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>