<?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>2014 (9) TMI 590 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251564</link>
    <description>The court partly allowed the writ petitions, setting aside the orders of the 2nd respondent and instructing them to entertain the revision without considering the limitation issue. The 2nd respondent was directed to pass orders on merits within eight weeks from the court&#039;s order. No costs were awarded, and the connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2014 10:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=365404" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (9) TMI 590 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251564</link>
      <description>The court partly allowed the writ petitions, setting aside the orders of the 2nd respondent and instructing them to entertain the revision without considering the limitation issue. The 2nd respondent was directed to pass orders on merits within eight weeks from the court&#039;s order. No costs were awarded, and the connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251564</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>