<?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 (5) TMI 386 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422126</link>
    <description>Where a statutory rectification application under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act was pending, the court directed the authority to consider it on merits after giving an opportunity of hearing and to pass orders within the stipulated time. The consequential demand notice was kept in abeyance until disposal of the rectification application. The result was protective relief to ensure that the rectification request was decided before any further coercive step on the demand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 May 2022 08:54:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=678571" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (5) TMI 386 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422126</link>
      <description>Where a statutory rectification application under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act was pending, the court directed the authority to consider it on merits after giving an opportunity of hearing and to pass orders within the stipulated time. The consequential demand notice was kept in abeyance until disposal of the rectification application. The result was protective relief to ensure that the rectification request was decided before any further coercive step on the demand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422126</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>