<?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 893 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754286</link>
    <description>The HC examined a tax demand challenge where the petitioner claimed lack of proper notice. The court set aside the original tax order, remanded the matter for reconsideration, and directed the petitioner to deposit 10% of disputed tax. The respondent was instructed to provide a fresh hearing and issue a new order within three months, with garnishee proceedings suspended. The case was disposed of without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 May 2025 13:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=756997" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (6) TMI 893 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754286</link>
      <description>The HC examined a tax demand challenge where the petitioner claimed lack of proper notice. The court set aside the original tax order, remanded the matter for reconsideration, and directed the petitioner to deposit 10% of disputed tax. The respondent was instructed to provide a fresh hearing and issue a new order within three months, with garnishee proceedings suspended. The case was disposed of without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754286</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>