<?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 976 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426737</link>
    <description>The HC examined the jurisdictional challenge to the Adjudicating Authority&#039;s power under CGST Act, 2017 to disallow CENVAT Credit from the previous regime. The court granted an interim stay on tax and penalty recovery, directing no coercive action against the petitioner. Both parties were instructed to submit written notes and legal provisions, with the Respondent given three weeks to file a counter affidavit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2025 16:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=688701" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (8) TMI 976 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426737</link>
      <description>The HC examined the jurisdictional challenge to the Adjudicating Authority&#039;s power under CGST Act, 2017 to disallow CENVAT Credit from the previous regime. The court granted an interim stay on tax and penalty recovery, directing no coercive action against the petitioner. Both parties were instructed to submit written notes and legal provisions, with the Respondent given three weeks to file a counter affidavit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426737</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>