<?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>2024 (1) TMI 1110 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448711</link>
    <description>The HC quashed the assessment order imposing tax liability, interest, and penalty for the financial year 2017-18 due to a turnover discrepancy between Form GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B. The petitioner, who claimed lack of notice awareness, was granted a two-week period to submit responses. The matter was remanded for reassessment, with instructions for the assessing officer to complete the process within two months. The case was disposed of without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Nov 2024 17:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=741469" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (1) TMI 1110 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448711</link>
      <description>The HC quashed the assessment order imposing tax liability, interest, and penalty for the financial year 2017-18 due to a turnover discrepancy between Form GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B. The petitioner, who claimed lack of notice awareness, was granted a two-week period to submit responses. The matter was remanded for reassessment, with instructions for the assessing officer to complete the process within two months. The case was disposed of without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448711</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>