<?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 (11) TMI 960 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446069</link>
    <description>HC ruled that a refund application for unutilized Input Tax Credit was improperly challenged by tax authorities. The communication citing deficiencies was deemed insufficient, and the officer was directed to process the application in accordance with Rule 89(2) of CGST Rules, while retaining the right to verify the claim and request additional documents if necessary.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2025 10:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=732861" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (11) TMI 960 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446069</link>
      <description>HC ruled that a refund application for unutilized Input Tax Credit was improperly challenged by tax authorities. The communication citing deficiencies was deemed insufficient, and the officer was directed to process the application in accordance with Rule 89(2) of CGST Rules, while retaining the right to verify the claim and request additional documents if necessary.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446069</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>