<?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 433 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758189</link>
    <description>A tax demand arising from mismatch between GSTR-3B and auto-populated GSTR-2A was set aside where the assessee had not been given an effective hearing before confirmation. The Court held that the matter should be reconsidered on merits after allowing a reply and granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing, including personal hearing, while balancing revenue interests by requiring payment of 10% of the disputed demand as a condition for remand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 May 2025 22:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=767202" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (9) TMI 433 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758189</link>
      <description>A tax demand arising from mismatch between GSTR-3B and auto-populated GSTR-2A was set aside where the assessee had not been given an effective hearing before confirmation. The Court held that the matter should be reconsidered on merits after allowing a reply and granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing, including personal hearing, while balancing revenue interests by requiring payment of 10% of the disputed demand as a condition for remand.</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=758189</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>