<?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 1388 - MADRAS  HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768002</link>
    <description>Delay in filing the appeal was condoned after the petitioner showed reasonable cause: the statutory notices had been uploaded on the portal, but no hard copy was served, and the demand came to notice only when recovery steps began. On that factual basis, the appellate order rejecting the appeal on limitation was set aside, and the appeal was directed to be heard on merits after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2025 08:31:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=809879" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 1388 - MADRAS  HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768002</link>
      <description>Delay in filing the appeal was condoned after the petitioner showed reasonable cause: the statutory notices had been uploaded on the portal, but no hard copy was served, and the demand came to notice only when recovery steps began. On that factual basis, the appellate order rejecting the appeal on limitation was set aside, and the appeal was directed to be heard on merits after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768002</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>