<?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 (9) TMI 983 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778494</link>
    <description>Duplicate and overlapping tax demands arising from the same transactions cannot be sustained where separate show cause notices culminate in orders confirming the same liability. The overlapping order in original and its consequential rectification order were set aside because the overlap was admitted and created duplicate liability. The appeal against the earlier order remained pending for independent determination on its merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2025 13:29:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=851113" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 983 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778494</link>
      <description>Duplicate and overlapping tax demands arising from the same transactions cannot be sustained where separate show cause notices culminate in orders confirming the same liability. The overlapping order in original and its consequential rectification order were set aside because the overlap was admitted and created duplicate liability. The appeal against the earlier order remained pending for independent determination on its merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778494</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>