<?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 918 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764854</link>
    <description>HC set aside impugned orders in DRC 01A and assessment orders for AY 2017-18 and 2019-20 involving ITC claim discrepancies and bank attachment. Court directed petitioner to deposit 25% of disputed taxes within four weeks as agreed by both parties&#039; counsel. The challenge related to Section 16 GST Act amendment implications on assessment proceedings. Petition was closed following the court&#039;s directive for partial tax deposit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 21 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2025 14:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=790180" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (1) TMI 918 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764854</link>
      <description>HC set aside impugned orders in DRC 01A and assessment orders for AY 2017-18 and 2019-20 involving ITC claim discrepancies and bank attachment. Court directed petitioner to deposit 25% of disputed taxes within four weeks as agreed by both parties&#039; counsel. The challenge related to Section 16 GST Act amendment implications on assessment proceedings. Petition was closed following the court&#039;s directive for partial tax deposit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 21 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764854</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>