<?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 (7) TMI 104 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396435</link>
    <description>Interest under section 50 was not exigible where the amount earlier treated as transitional credit was later ed as refundable and had already been adjusted against tax liability. Once the respondent passed a subsequent order treating the amount as excess and liable to refund, the factual basis for any interest demand ceased to exist. On those facts, no further demand on that basis could survive and the writ petition was closed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2025 10:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=616689" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (7) TMI 104 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396435</link>
      <description>Interest under section 50 was not exigible where the amount earlier treated as transitional credit was later ed as refundable and had already been adjusted against tax liability. Once the respondent passed a subsequent order treating the amount as excess and liable to refund, the factual basis for any interest demand ceased to exist. On those facts, no further demand on that basis could survive and the writ petition was closed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396435</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>