<?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>2023 (2) TMI 880 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434365</link>
    <description>HC partially upheld the petitioner&#039;s challenge to the Assessment Order under GST Act. The Court directed the petitioner to deposit 50% of the disputed tax amount within four weeks. Upon deposit, the order would be quashed and remanded for reconsideration. Failure to comply would result in order confirmation, balancing procedural requirements with substantive tax dispute resolution.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2025 11:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=705398" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (2) TMI 880 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434365</link>
      <description>HC partially upheld the petitioner&#039;s challenge to the Assessment Order under GST Act. The Court directed the petitioner to deposit 50% of the disputed tax amount within four weeks. Upon deposit, the order would be quashed and remanded for reconsideration. Failure to comply would result in order confirmation, balancing procedural requirements with substantive tax dispute resolution.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434365</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>