<?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 731 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767345</link>
    <description>HC ruled on a GST tax credit dispute, finding procedural deficiencies in the tax authority&#039;s notice. The court set aside the disputed order due to improper service and lack of adequate opportunity for the taxpayer to respond. The case was remanded for reconsideration, with the condition that the taxpayer deposit 25% of the disputed taxes within four weeks, ensuring a fair hearing while protecting revenue interests.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 11:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=806398" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 731 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767345</link>
      <description>HC ruled on a GST tax credit dispute, finding procedural deficiencies in the tax authority&#039;s notice. The court set aside the disputed order due to improper service and lack of adequate opportunity for the taxpayer to respond. The case was remanded for reconsideration, with the condition that the taxpayer deposit 25% of the disputed taxes within four weeks, ensuring a fair hearing while protecting revenue interests.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767345</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>