<?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 (2) TMI 1738 - CHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284594</link>
    <description>The court held that the Senior Intelligence Officer lacked the authority to arrest the petitioners without the Commissioner&#039;s authorization based on &quot;reasons to believe&quot; under sections 69 and 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act. The petitioners were directed to cooperate with the investigation but ensured no immediate arrest on the first day of appearance. The judgment emphasized adherence to statutory provisions and fair conduct in official actions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2019 10:20:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=595526" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (2) TMI 1738 - CHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284594</link>
      <description>The court held that the Senior Intelligence Officer lacked the authority to arrest the petitioners without the Commissioner&#039;s authorization based on &quot;reasons to believe&quot; under sections 69 and 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act. The petitioners were directed to cooperate with the investigation but ensured no immediate arrest on the first day of appearance. The judgment emphasized adherence to statutory provisions and fair conduct in official actions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284594</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>