<?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 (7) TMI 800 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755580</link>
    <description>HC analyzed a GST tax dispute involving procedural and substantive tax compliance issues. Despite time-bar arguments and procedural non-compliance, the court granted partial relief by quashing the impugned order and remitting the case back to the tax authority. The petitioner was directed to deposit a specified amount and file a reply, with the authority mandated to pass fresh orders within three months, ensuring principles of natural justice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 May 2025 16:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=760166" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 800 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755580</link>
      <description>HC analyzed a GST tax dispute involving procedural and substantive tax compliance issues. Despite time-bar arguments and procedural non-compliance, the court granted partial relief by quashing the impugned order and remitting the case back to the tax authority. The petitioner was directed to deposit a specified amount and file a reply, with the authority mandated to pass fresh orders within three months, ensuring principles of natural justice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755580</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>