<?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 (3) TMI 170 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766785</link>
    <description>HC quashed the impugned order and allowed the petition. The court held the state GST audit constituted a proceeding initiated before the central show-cause notice, a summons under section 70 amounting to an investigation, and the subject matter of both proceedings was identical. Because the state proceeding had commenced first, the central action was impermissible, and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2025 14:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=803451" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 170 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766785</link>
      <description>HC quashed the impugned order and allowed the petition. The court held the state GST audit constituted a proceeding initiated before the central show-cause notice, a summons under section 70 amounting to an investigation, and the subject matter of both proceedings was identical. Because the state proceeding had commenced first, the central action was impermissible, and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766785</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>