<?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 (2) TMI 289 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449138</link>
    <description>The HC examined a tax payment representation under TNGST Act. The court directed the proper officer to consider the petitioner&#039;s request for time extension under Section 79(1)(c)(iv) within two months. The ruling allows the petitioner to seek attachment revocation, subject to the officer&#039;s discretionary terms, while ensuring procedural fairness in tax recovery proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 18:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=742576" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 289 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449138</link>
      <description>The HC examined a tax payment representation under TNGST Act. The court directed the proper officer to consider the petitioner&#039;s request for time extension under Section 79(1)(c)(iv) within two months. The ruling allows the petitioner to seek attachment revocation, subject to the officer&#039;s discretionary terms, while ensuring procedural fairness in tax recovery proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449138</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>