<?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 (6) TMI 1083 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299865</link>
    <description>A writ challenge concerned a show-cause notice proposing GST under the reverse charge mechanism on royalty or seigniorage charges linked to mining lease extraction services. The Court noted that interference at the notice stage is ordinarily limited, but considered the issue because it went to the very incidence of tax on royalty or seigniorage charges. Pending further proceedings, the impugned notice was kept in abeyance by interim suspension.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2025 13:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=665826" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (6) TMI 1083 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299865</link>
      <description>A writ challenge concerned a show-cause notice proposing GST under the reverse charge mechanism on royalty or seigniorage charges linked to mining lease extraction services. The Court noted that interference at the notice stage is ordinarily limited, but considered the issue because it went to the very incidence of tax on royalty or seigniorage charges. Pending further proceedings, the impugned notice was kept in abeyance by interim suspension.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299865</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>