<?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 (9) TMI 558 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442936</link>
    <description>A State Tax Officer&#039;s communication issued under the MGST Act was withdrawn after the State conceded that the officer lacked jurisdiction to issue it. The High Court accepted the withdrawal, directed immediate intimation of that withdrawal to the Officer In Charge of Central Depository Services (India) Ltd and required the petitioner to inform CDS (India) Ltd and provide a copy of the order. In view of the withdrawal, no further adjudication of the writ petition was called for, and the petition was disposed of without costs. The Court also made clear that it expressed no opinion on any separate recovery proceedings that the respondents might initiate against the company or its directors.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Apr 2025 12:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=725872" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (9) TMI 558 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442936</link>
      <description>A State Tax Officer&#039;s communication issued under the MGST Act was withdrawn after the State conceded that the officer lacked jurisdiction to issue it. The High Court accepted the withdrawal, directed immediate intimation of that withdrawal to the Officer In Charge of Central Depository Services (India) Ltd and required the petitioner to inform CDS (India) Ltd and provide a copy of the order. In view of the withdrawal, no further adjudication of the writ petition was called for, and the petition was disposed of without costs. The Court also made clear that it expressed no opinion on any separate recovery proceedings that the respondents might initiate against the company or its directors.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442936</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>