<?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 (4) TMI 104 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750923</link>
    <description>The SC examined a GST registration cancellation case where the petitioner challenged a retrospective cancellation based on an allegedly incorrect Field Visit Report. The court issued notice to respondents, who agreed to review the revocation petition within two weeks. The Competent Authority was directed to reconsider the cancellation, ensuring procedural fairness and providing the petitioner an opportunity to present evidence and seek remedy.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2025 14:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=748932" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (4) TMI 104 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750923</link>
      <description>The SC examined a GST registration cancellation case where the petitioner challenged a retrospective cancellation based on an allegedly incorrect Field Visit Report. The court issued notice to respondents, who agreed to review the revocation petition within two weeks. The Competent Authority was directed to reconsider the cancellation, ensuring procedural fairness and providing the petitioner an opportunity to present evidence and seek remedy.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750923</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>