<?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 (8) TMI 751 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426512</link>
    <description>HC analyzed a mandamus petition challenging seizure under CGST Act. The court rejected the refund request, holding that authorities can retain seized assets until assessment proceedings conclude. Section 67 interpretation allowed retention of seized amount pending adjudication. The court directed timely completion of proceedings and potential future refund, dismissing the writ petition without imposing costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Apr 2025 12:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=688188" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (8) TMI 751 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426512</link>
      <description>HC analyzed a mandamus petition challenging seizure under CGST Act. The court rejected the refund request, holding that authorities can retain seized assets until assessment proceedings conclude. Section 67 interpretation allowed retention of seized amount pending adjudication. The court directed timely completion of proceedings and potential future refund, dismissing the writ petition without imposing costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426512</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>