<?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 (9) TMI 596 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398477</link>
    <description>The court allowed the Writ Petition challenging the denial of the Scrutiny Report to the petitioner by the first respondent. Emphasizing the petitioner&#039;s right to access the report and the independent adjudicating authority of the first respondent, the court directed the first respondent to provide the Scrutiny Report to the petitioner. The petitioner agreed to cooperate with the adjudication process, leading to a fair resolution without costs awarded, and the connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2021 17:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=622463" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (9) TMI 596 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398477</link>
      <description>The court allowed the Writ Petition challenging the denial of the Scrutiny Report to the petitioner by the first respondent. Emphasizing the petitioner&#039;s right to access the report and the independent adjudicating authority of the first respondent, the court directed the first respondent to provide the Scrutiny Report to the petitioner. The petitioner agreed to cooperate with the adjudication process, leading to a fair resolution without costs awarded, and the connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398477</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>