<?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 (4) TMI 1644 - SC Order (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462094</link>
    <description>SC granted condonation of delay but refused to intervene in the underlying judgment. The special leave petitions were dismissed, with the court explicitly noting that this dismissal would not preclude petitioners from pursuing alternative legal remedies. All associated applications were disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2025 20:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=823443" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (4) TMI 1644 - SC Order (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462094</link>
      <description>SC granted condonation of delay but refused to intervene in the underlying judgment. The special leave petitions were dismissed, with the court explicitly noting that this dismissal would not preclude petitioners from pursuing alternative legal remedies. All associated applications were disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462094</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>