<?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 (12) TMI 1071 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336426</link>
    <description>The court set aside the impugned order due to reliance on an overruled Supreme Court decision and directed the petitioner to appear for a fresh hearing. The Adjudicating Authority was instructed to pass a new order after giving the petitioner a fair opportunity. The court clarified that setting aside the order did not reflect the case&#039;s merits. The writ petition was disposed of without costs, and the related miscellaneous petition was closed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2017 15:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=452390" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1071 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336426</link>
      <description>The court set aside the impugned order due to reliance on an overruled Supreme Court decision and directed the petitioner to appear for a fresh hearing. The Adjudicating Authority was instructed to pass a new order after giving the petitioner a fair opportunity. The court clarified that setting aside the order did not reflect the case&#039;s merits. The writ petition was disposed of without costs, and the related miscellaneous petition was closed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336426</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>