<?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 771 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774703</link>
    <description>Calcutta HC dismissed department&#039;s appeal against refund claim order due to 91-day delay, finding it time-barred. Court held that diligence standards apply equally to both department and assessee. HC modified lower court&#039;s direction, requiring respondent to rectify all deficiencies identified by department and file fresh refund application within two weeks of receiving order copy. Appeal dismissed with modified compliance directions for proper refund application processing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2025 18:11:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=835511" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 771 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774703</link>
      <description>Calcutta HC dismissed department&#039;s appeal against refund claim order due to 91-day delay, finding it time-barred. Court held that diligence standards apply equally to both department and assessee. HC modified lower court&#039;s direction, requiring respondent to rectify all deficiencies identified by department and file fresh refund application within two weeks of receiving order copy. Appeal dismissed with modified compliance directions for proper refund application processing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774703</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>