<?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 884 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767498</link>
    <description>Service of notice had to be effected only through the prescribed modes under Section 169(1)(a), (b) and (c) of the CGST Act; where valid service was not shown, the assessment and consequential GST DRC-07 proceedings could not be sustained. Applying the earlier batch ruling on notice service, the assessment order was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after proper notice, opportunity to reply, and hearing. The bank attachment, if any, was also raised.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 11:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=807291" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 884 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767498</link>
      <description>Service of notice had to be effected only through the prescribed modes under Section 169(1)(a), (b) and (c) of the CGST Act; where valid service was not shown, the assessment and consequential GST DRC-07 proceedings could not be sustained. Applying the earlier batch ruling on notice service, the assessment order was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after proper notice, opportunity to reply, and hearing. The bank attachment, if any, was also raised.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767498</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>