<?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 (7) TMI 395 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409553</link>
    <description>A challenge was raised to a circular and related e-way bill notifications under the Uttar Pradesh GST regime on the ground that a rescinded notification could not be revived by circular and that the Commissioner lacked power to override the earlier notification. No adjudication on these issues was made at this stage. The State was granted time to file a response, and the petitioner was permitted to file a rejoinder before the matter was listed again.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2025 11:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=649259" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (7) TMI 395 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409553</link>
      <description>A challenge was raised to a circular and related e-way bill notifications under the Uttar Pradesh GST regime on the ground that a rescinded notification could not be revived by circular and that the Commissioner lacked power to override the earlier notification. No adjudication on these issues was made at this stage. The State was granted time to file a response, and the petitioner was permitted to file a rejoinder before the matter was listed again.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409553</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>