<?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 (7) TMI 528 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440255</link>
    <description>HC found the tax order under Section 74 of GST Act procedurally flawed. The court stayed the tax demand, noting the assessing officer did not address preliminary jurisdiction as mandated by previous judicial directions. Revenue was directed to file a counter affidavit, and the matter was listed for further hearing, temporarily suspending the contested tax assessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2025 17:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=719412" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (7) TMI 528 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440255</link>
      <description>HC found the tax order under Section 74 of GST Act procedurally flawed. The court stayed the tax demand, noting the assessing officer did not address preliminary jurisdiction as mandated by previous judicial directions. Revenue was directed to file a counter affidavit, and the matter was listed for further hearing, temporarily suspending the contested tax assessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440255</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>