<?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 (9) TMI 390 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758146</link>
    <description>GST assessment orders were quashed and the matters remitted for fresh adjudication where the petitioner had an arguable case on merits despite not replying to the notices earlier. The Court directed compliance with conditions, including deposit of 25% of the disputed tax within the stipulated time, filing of a reply, and appearance for hearing. Fresh orders were to be passed on merits in accordance with law, ensuring the petitioner an effective hearing before reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 May 2025 21:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=767073" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (9) TMI 390 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758146</link>
      <description>GST assessment orders were quashed and the matters remitted for fresh adjudication where the petitioner had an arguable case on merits despite not replying to the notices earlier. The Court directed compliance with conditions, including deposit of 25% of the disputed tax within the stipulated time, filing of a reply, and appearance for hearing. Fresh orders were to be passed on merits in accordance with law, ensuring the petitioner an effective hearing before reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758146</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>