<?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 (12) TMI 515 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352246</link>
    <description>Pending representations on the tax treatment of ongoing works contracts were treated as matters for the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to examine, with the Court treating that office as the appropriate authority to address the grievance. The Court directed consideration of the representations on merits and in accordance with law, after giving the affected party an opportunity of personal hearing. The Commissioner was required to pass orders within four weeks.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Mar 2018 16:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=499259" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 515 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352246</link>
      <description>Pending representations on the tax treatment of ongoing works contracts were treated as matters for the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to examine, with the Court treating that office as the appropriate authority to address the grievance. The Court directed consideration of the representations on merits and in accordance with law, after giving the affected party an opportunity of personal hearing. The Commissioner was required to pass orders within four weeks.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352246</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>