<?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>2018 (4) TMI 1902 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299685</link>
    <description>Writ proceedings were disposed of by directing the petitioner to file a reply to the show cause notice, requiring the respondent to afford a personal hearing, and mandating a speaking order on merits in accordance with law. The court did not decide the dispute substantively at this stage and instead ensured compliance with fair procedure before any final action is taken.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Dec 2021 20:33:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=665101" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 1902 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299685</link>
      <description>Writ proceedings were disposed of by directing the petitioner to file a reply to the show cause notice, requiring the respondent to afford a personal hearing, and mandating a speaking order on merits in accordance with law. The court did not decide the dispute substantively at this stage and instead ensured compliance with fair procedure before any final action is taken.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299685</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>