<?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 (12) TMI 934 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763354</link>
    <description>An appellate dismissal for failure to indicate pre-deposit in the online filing form was found unsustainable where the mandatory pre-deposit was later paid through the electronic cash ledger. The initial omission was treated as an inadvertent clerical defect, and rigid insistence on that error was considered disproportionately formalistic. The dismissal order was set aside and the appeal was restored for consideration on merits in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2025 14:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=783210" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (12) TMI 934 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763354</link>
      <description>An appellate dismissal for failure to indicate pre-deposit in the online filing form was found unsustainable where the mandatory pre-deposit was later paid through the electronic cash ledger. The initial omission was treated as an inadvertent clerical defect, and rigid insistence on that error was considered disproportionately formalistic. The dismissal order was set aside and the appeal was restored for consideration on merits in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763354</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>