<?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 1241 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756021</link>
    <description>HC examined a GST Act challenge involving service of notice and discretionary relief. The court directed the appellant to pursue an alternative remedy under Section 33B(3), granting four weeks to file an appeal. The HC emphasized examining service validity as a preliminary issue and instructed the Appellate Authority to hear the matter, without interfering with the original order or awarding costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 May 2025 11:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=761653" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 1241 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756021</link>
      <description>HC examined a GST Act challenge involving service of notice and discretionary relief. The court directed the appellant to pursue an alternative remedy under Section 33B(3), granting four weeks to file an appeal. The HC emphasized examining service validity as a preliminary issue and instructed the Appellate Authority to hear the matter, without interfering with the original order or awarding costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756021</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>