<?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>2017 (7) TMI 8 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344896</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the writ petition filed under Article 226 challenging an Order in Original demanding payment of Cenvat credit. The Court held that the doctrine of merger does not apply when statutory appeals are not entertained due to non-compliance with preconditions. Despite finding no denial of natural justice, the Court granted the petitioner another opportunity to produce original invoices. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remitted back to the Original Authority for re-examination without considering the period of limitation. The petitioner was directed to produce all relevant original invoices and documents to prevent default orders.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Jul 2017 18:34:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=478381" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 8 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344896</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the writ petition filed under Article 226 challenging an Order in Original demanding payment of Cenvat credit. The Court held that the doctrine of merger does not apply when statutory appeals are not entertained due to non-compliance with preconditions. Despite finding no denial of natural justice, the Court granted the petitioner another opportunity to produce original invoices. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remitted back to the Original Authority for re-examination without considering the period of limitation. The petitioner was directed to produce all relevant original invoices and documents to prevent default orders.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344896</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>