<?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 (6) TMI 1245 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773132</link>
    <description>The SC found that uploading notices solely on the GST portal does not constitute effective service. The court held that when electronic notices go unacknowledged, authorities must explore alternative service modes under Section 169. The impugned order was set aside, with the matter remanded for fresh adjudication after directing the petitioner to deposit 25% of disputed tax and ensuring proper service and hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2025 09:04:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=829763" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 1245 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773132</link>
      <description>The SC found that uploading notices solely on the GST portal does not constitute effective service. The court held that when electronic notices go unacknowledged, authorities must explore alternative service modes under Section 169. The impugned order was set aside, with the matter remanded for fresh adjudication after directing the petitioner to deposit 25% of disputed tax and ensuring proper service and hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773132</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>