<?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 (10) TMI 1294 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760695</link>
    <description>An order passed against a person who had already died was held unsustainable because the death certificate showed the person had died before the impugned order was issued, and the legal heirship certificate established the petitioners as the legal heirs. On that basis, the order was set aside as having been made against a deceased person, while liberty was reserved to the respondent to initiate appropriate proceedings against the legal heirs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 May 2025 13:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=775566" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (10) TMI 1294 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760695</link>
      <description>An order passed against a person who had already died was held unsustainable because the death certificate showed the person had died before the impugned order was issued, and the legal heirship certificate established the petitioners as the legal heirs. On that basis, the order was set aside as having been made against a deceased person, while liberty was reserved to the respondent to initiate appropriate proceedings against the legal heirs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760695</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>