<?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>2005 (5) TMI 681 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289378</link>
    <description>The Court dismissed the writ petitions, emphasizing compliance with the procedures outlined in the AGST Act and Rules for refunds and adjustments of excess security deposits. It found no illegality in the Respondents&#039; demands for additional security, highlighting the importance of adhering to statutory provisions. The interim orders issued in the writ petitions were vacated.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2020 10:12:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=618530" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (5) TMI 681 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289378</link>
      <description>The Court dismissed the writ petitions, emphasizing compliance with the procedures outlined in the AGST Act and Rules for refunds and adjustments of excess security deposits. It found no illegality in the Respondents&#039; demands for additional security, highlighting the importance of adhering to statutory provisions. The interim orders issued in the writ petitions were vacated.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289378</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>