<?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 1616 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369650</link>
    <description>HC directed petitioners to approach Nodal Officer regarding GST transition challenges, technical glitches in Input Tax Credit, and assessment order disputes. The court mandated a two-month period for the Nodal Officer to review representations, allowed filing of returns, and preserved the right to appeal under Section 107 of KGST Act. Petitioners retain the option to challenge prejudicial orders through legal remedies.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2025 11:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=540164" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 1616 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369650</link>
      <description>HC directed petitioners to approach Nodal Officer regarding GST transition challenges, technical glitches in Input Tax Credit, and assessment order disputes. The court mandated a two-month period for the Nodal Officer to review representations, allowed filing of returns, and preserved the right to appeal under Section 107 of KGST Act. Petitioners retain the option to challenge prejudicial orders through legal remedies.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369650</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>