<?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>2018 (10) TMI 940 - KERLA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368974</link>
    <description>The court directed the petitioner, a registered dealer under the Goods and Service Tax Act, to apply to the Nodal Officer for facilitating the uploading of necessary forms without reference to the time-frame. The rejection orders on Exhibits P15, P16, and P17 were quashed, allowing the petitioner to claim the refund based on the physically filed applications. The respondents were directed to complete the process within three months.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2025 10:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=538646" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 940 - KERLA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368974</link>
      <description>The court directed the petitioner, a registered dealer under the Goods and Service Tax Act, to apply to the Nodal Officer for facilitating the uploading of necessary forms without reference to the time-frame. The rejection orders on Exhibits P15, P16, and P17 were quashed, allowing the petitioner to claim the refund based on the physically filed applications. The respondents were directed to complete the process within three months.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368974</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>