<?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 932 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434417</link>
    <description>The Madras HC treated the seven-day requirement to furnish a certified copy under Rule 108(3) of the Tamil Nadu GST Rules as directory, not mandatory. Because the rule did not contain an express bar on condonation, non-filing within the stipulated period was held to be a curable procedural defect that could not defeat a timely statutory appeal on a mere technicality. The respondent was directed to accept the certified copy and process the appeal in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2025 13:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=705552" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (2) TMI 932 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434417</link>
      <description>The Madras HC treated the seven-day requirement to furnish a certified copy under Rule 108(3) of the Tamil Nadu GST Rules as directory, not mandatory. Because the rule did not contain an express bar on condonation, non-filing within the stipulated period was held to be a curable procedural defect that could not defeat a timely statutory appeal on a mere technicality. The respondent was directed to accept the certified copy and process the appeal in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434417</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>