<?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 (4) TMI 179 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406063</link>
    <description>The court allowed the writ petition, directing a re-hearing process within eight weeks from the judgment date. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter remanded for a fresh hearing, instructing consideration of the Chennai Digital Print Advertising Private Limited order&#039;s ratio and other relevant decisions. The court highlighted the necessity for authorities to consider precedents, emphasizing rectification due to errors apparent on record.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2021 12:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=640890" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (4) TMI 179 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406063</link>
      <description>The court allowed the writ petition, directing a re-hearing process within eight weeks from the judgment date. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter remanded for a fresh hearing, instructing consideration of the Chennai Digital Print Advertising Private Limited order&#039;s ratio and other relevant decisions. The court highlighted the necessity for authorities to consider precedents, emphasizing rectification due to errors apparent on record.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406063</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>