<?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 1616 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775548</link>
    <description>The HC disposed of writ petitions challenging the vires of Sections 69 and 132 of the GST Act, 2017, concerning arrest powers and punishment, directing disposal in line with the SC&#039;s ruling in Radhika Agarwal&#039;s case. Despite adjournments to allow representation, some petitioners remained unrepresented. Given the factual matrix and absence of counsel, the HC declined further adjournments and disposed of the petitions accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Jul 2025 08:39:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=838754" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 1616 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775548</link>
      <description>The HC disposed of writ petitions challenging the vires of Sections 69 and 132 of the GST Act, 2017, concerning arrest powers and punishment, directing disposal in line with the SC&#039;s ruling in Radhika Agarwal&#039;s case. Despite adjournments to allow representation, some petitioners remained unrepresented. Given the factual matrix and absence of counsel, the HC declined further adjournments and disposed of the petitions accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775548</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>