<?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 (2) TMI 893 - CHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392449</link>
    <description>The court held that since the owner of the goods had appeared and was contesting the case, the truck driver, the petitioner, had no grievance regarding the tax and penalty demand notice issued to him. The court disposed of the writ petition accordingly, emphasizing that any confiscation proceedings should be directed against the owner of the goods, not the driver.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Mar 2025 12:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=604615" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 893 - CHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392449</link>
      <description>The court held that since the owner of the goods had appeared and was contesting the case, the truck driver, the petitioner, had no grievance regarding the tax and penalty demand notice issued to him. The court disposed of the writ petition accordingly, emphasizing that any confiscation proceedings should be directed against the owner of the goods, not the driver.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392449</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>