<?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>2021 (1) TMI 1092 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403500</link>
    <description>A constitutional challenge was raised to the vires of Sections 69, 132, 135 and 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017 and the U.P. GST Act, 2017, with the court considering whether notice should be issued on that challenge. Notice was issued to the Attorney General of India and the Advocate General of Uttar Pradesh, and counter affidavits were directed within four weeks, followed by rejoinder.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2025 18:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=634198" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (1) TMI 1092 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403500</link>
      <description>A constitutional challenge was raised to the vires of Sections 69, 132, 135 and 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017 and the U.P. GST Act, 2017, with the court considering whether notice should be issued on that challenge. Notice was issued to the Attorney General of India and the Advocate General of Uttar Pradesh, and counter affidavits were directed within four weeks, followed by rejoinder.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403500</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>