<?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>2019 (1) TMI 813 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373648</link>
    <description>Refund applications concerning excess input tax credit were directed to be considered by the first respondent, and orders were to be passed on merits and in accordance with law within eight weeks. The court did not decide the petitioner&#039;s substantive entitlement to refund, and no final adjudication was made on that claim.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2019 06:52:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=553453" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 813 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373648</link>
      <description>Refund applications concerning excess input tax credit were directed to be considered by the first respondent, and orders were to be passed on merits and in accordance with law within eight weeks. The court did not decide the petitioner&#039;s substantive entitlement to refund, and no final adjudication was made on that claim.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373648</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>