<?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>2026 (3) TMI 303 - TRIPURA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787548</link>
    <description>Where departmental proceedings have already commenced and the disputed allegations depend on factual inquiry, writ interference at the charge-memo stage is unwarranted. The Court found that issues such as the identity of the officers who issued the assessment orders and alleged overwriting in the records could not be conclusively resolved in writ jurisdiction before inquiry. The writ court&#039;s interference with the suspension and disciplinary steps was therefore not sustained in full, but the order was modified rather than wholly set aside. The departmental inquiry was allowed to continue, the respondent was permitted to remain in service, and the inquiry authority was directed to conclude the proceeding expeditiously.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2026 07:53:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=889459" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (3) TMI 303 - TRIPURA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787548</link>
      <description>Where departmental proceedings have already commenced and the disputed allegations depend on factual inquiry, writ interference at the charge-memo stage is unwarranted. The Court found that issues such as the identity of the officers who issued the assessment orders and alleged overwriting in the records could not be conclusively resolved in writ jurisdiction before inquiry. The writ court&#039;s interference with the suspension and disciplinary steps was therefore not sustained in full, but the order was modified rather than wholly set aside. The departmental inquiry was allowed to continue, the respondent was permitted to remain in service, and the inquiry authority was directed to conclude the proceeding expeditiously.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT / Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787548</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>