<?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>2016 (10) TMI 438 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333418</link>
    <description>The court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the notice challenged by the petitioner and directing the respondent to refund the excess tax collected as per the original refund order within four weeks. The court deemed the procedures followed by the respondent and the Deputy Commissioner as illegal. No costs were awarded, and the related Writ Miscellaneous Petition was closed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=444543" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 438 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333418</link>
      <description>The court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the notice challenged by the petitioner and directing the respondent to refund the excess tax collected as per the original refund order within four weeks. The court deemed the procedures followed by the respondent and the Deputy Commissioner as illegal. No costs were awarded, and the related Writ Miscellaneous Petition was closed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333418</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>