<?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 (5) TMI 461 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770189</link>
    <description>HC ruled on GST tax dispute, finding procedural irregularities in tax recovery order. The court set aside the original order due to lack of proper notice and opportunity to be heard. Petitioner was directed to deposit 25% of disputed tax and allowed to file objections. Recovery proceedings were stayed, with a condition that non-compliance would restore the original order. The decision emphasizes procedural fairness in tax adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 09:09:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=820273" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 461 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770189</link>
      <description>HC ruled on GST tax dispute, finding procedural irregularities in tax recovery order. The court set aside the original order due to lack of proper notice and opportunity to be heard. Petitioner was directed to deposit 25% of disputed tax and allowed to file objections. Recovery proceedings were stayed, with a condition that non-compliance would restore the original order. The decision emphasizes procedural fairness in tax adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770189</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>