<?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>2022 (3) TMI 738 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419700</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging tax proceedings where petitioner sought to set off input tax credit against GST liability. The court found petitioner failed to substantiate inward supplies documentation and noted the petition appeared to be an attempt to avoid pre-deposit requirements for statutory appeal. Despite petitioner&#039;s system issues claims and allegations of jurisdictional errors, the court emphasized that mere electronic reflection of ITC is insufficient without valid documentation. The petition was dismissed with liberty for petitioner to pursue alternate remedy before the Deputy Commissioner within thirty days, who was directed to consider the appeal according to law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2025 17:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=673177" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (3) TMI 738 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419700</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging tax proceedings where petitioner sought to set off input tax credit against GST liability. The court found petitioner failed to substantiate inward supplies documentation and noted the petition appeared to be an attempt to avoid pre-deposit requirements for statutory appeal. Despite petitioner&#039;s system issues claims and allegations of jurisdictional errors, the court emphasized that mere electronic reflection of ITC is insufficient without valid documentation. The petition was dismissed with liberty for petitioner to pursue alternate remedy before the Deputy Commissioner within thirty days, who was directed to consider the appeal according to law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419700</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>