<?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 (7) TMI 546 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774478</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed a writ petition challenging inaction by GST and Income Tax Officials regarding tax evasion complaints. The petitioner filed complaints against private parties, and notices were issued but no further action was taken. The court held that under Article 226, petitioners must demonstrate personal rights being infringed or adverse effects suffered. The petitioner failed to show how he was personally affected by the officials&#039; inaction, suffered any injury, or had legal grievance. Without personal interest or rights violation, the petitioner lacked locus standi to seek mandamus and was not an aggrieved person. The petition was dismissed as not maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2025 08:50:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=834602" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 546 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774478</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed a writ petition challenging inaction by GST and Income Tax Officials regarding tax evasion complaints. The petitioner filed complaints against private parties, and notices were issued but no further action was taken. The court held that under Article 226, petitioners must demonstrate personal rights being infringed or adverse effects suffered. The petitioner failed to show how he was personally affected by the officials&#039; inaction, suffered any injury, or had legal grievance. Without personal interest or rights violation, the petitioner lacked locus standi to seek mandamus and was not an aggrieved person. The petition was dismissed as not maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774478</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>