<?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>2025 (1) TMI 778 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764714</link>
    <description>Invoice-wise verification was necessary to test whether the transactions fell below the e-way bill threshold; because the supporting invoices had not been produced before the authority, the existing order was unsustainable. The High Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter for fresh consideration, directing the petitioner to produce the invoices and the authority to afford a hearing before passing a fresh order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2025 14:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=789271" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (1) TMI 778 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764714</link>
      <description>Invoice-wise verification was necessary to test whether the transactions fell below the e-way bill threshold; because the supporting invoices had not been produced before the authority, the existing order was unsustainable. The High Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter for fresh consideration, directing the petitioner to produce the invoices and the authority to afford a hearing before passing a fresh order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764714</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>