<?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>2020 (1) TMI 199 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390586</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the show-cause notice, and directed the respondents to refund the specified amount to the petitioner within a stipulated timeframe. The judgment primarily focused on the violation of the limitation period for adjudication under the Finance Act, 1994, emphasizing the significance of timely adjudication and decision communication in legal proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=599510" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (1) TMI 199 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390586</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the show-cause notice, and directed the respondents to refund the specified amount to the petitioner within a stipulated timeframe. The judgment primarily focused on the violation of the limitation period for adjudication under the Finance Act, 1994, emphasizing the significance of timely adjudication and decision communication in legal proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390586</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>