<?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 (6) TMI 230 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753623</link>
    <description>The AP HC ruled that an unsigned order under the CGST Act, 2017 is legally invalid. The Court referenced prior judgments, emphasizing the necessity of signatures for legal efficacy. Consequently, the petition was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the respondents were directed to issue new, compliant orders within three weeks.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2024 20:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=755520" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (6) TMI 230 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753623</link>
      <description>The AP HC ruled that an unsigned order under the CGST Act, 2017 is legally invalid. The Court referenced prior judgments, emphasizing the necessity of signatures for legal efficacy. Consequently, the petition was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the respondents were directed to issue new, compliant orders within three weeks.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753623</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>