<?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 (2) TMI 811 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766264</link>
    <description>An adjudicatory or coercive order cannot validly be issued against a deceased person. Where the assessee had died before the order in original and the consequential recovery proceedings were passed, those proceedings were treated as unsustainable and liable to be quashed as a nullity. The court set aside the impugned order and consequential recovery action, while leaving liberty to proceed against the appropriate persons in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2025 08:23:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=800193" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (2) TMI 811 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766264</link>
      <description>An adjudicatory or coercive order cannot validly be issued against a deceased person. Where the assessee had died before the order in original and the consequential recovery proceedings were passed, those proceedings were treated as unsustainable and liable to be quashed as a nullity. The court set aside the impugned order and consequential recovery action, while leaving liberty to proceed against the appropriate persons in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766264</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>