<?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 602 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758358</link>
    <description>HC ruled that deposits were not made under demonstrable coercion. The petitioner can seek tax refund through appropriate legal channels if excess amounts were paid. The court noted the petitioner could have challenged alleged threats through available legal remedies. Petition was disposed of with directions to follow statutory procedures for potential refund claims.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 May 2025 19:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=767695" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (9) TMI 602 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758358</link>
      <description>HC ruled that deposits were not made under demonstrable coercion. The petitioner can seek tax refund through appropriate legal channels if excess amounts were paid. The court noted the petitioner could have challenged alleged threats through available legal remedies. Petition was disposed of with directions to follow statutory procedures for potential refund claims.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758358</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>