<?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 (9) TMI 518 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412173</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the petition challenging the cancellation of registration under the CGST Act, emphasizing the petitioner&#039;s delay in filing for revocation and approaching the court. The petitioner&#039;s failure to challenge the cancellation within the prescribed timeline led to the order attaining finality. The court held that the petitioner could not claim the revival of registration to benefit from the amnesty scheme after neglecting their rights following the cancellation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Sep 2021 09:56:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=655489" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (9) TMI 518 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412173</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the petition challenging the cancellation of registration under the CGST Act, emphasizing the petitioner&#039;s delay in filing for revocation and approaching the court. The petitioner&#039;s failure to challenge the cancellation within the prescribed timeline led to the order attaining finality. The court held that the petitioner could not claim the revival of registration to benefit from the amnesty scheme after neglecting their rights following the cancellation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412173</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>