<?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 (8) TMI 418 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397475</link>
    <description>The appeal was dismissed, affirming the legality of proceedings under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, the validity of search and seizure actions, and the attachment of bank accounts. The court found no substantiation for allegations of harassment, upholding the voluntary nature of the payment made by the appellants. It was suggested that further legal action could be pursued by the appellants if they sought to strengthen their claims.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2020 11:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=620032" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (8) TMI 418 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397475</link>
      <description>The appeal was dismissed, affirming the legality of proceedings under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, the validity of search and seizure actions, and the attachment of bank accounts. The court found no substantiation for allegations of harassment, upholding the voluntary nature of the payment made by the appellants. It was suggested that further legal action could be pursued by the appellants if they sought to strengthen their claims.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397475</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>