<?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 (12) TMI 1820 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468243</link>
    <description>Maintainability of the petition was questioned because an alternative statutory appeal under the CGST Act was available, and the petitioner also complained that the adjudication officer had not supplied documents or allowed cross-examination. The Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition, while granting four weeks&#039; additional time to pursue the statutory appeal and directing that the High Court&#039;s interim protection continue for that period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 20:01:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=898123" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (12) TMI 1820 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468243</link>
      <description>Maintainability of the petition was questioned because an alternative statutory appeal under the CGST Act was available, and the petitioner also complained that the adjudication officer had not supplied documents or allowed cross-examination. The Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition, while granting four weeks&#039; additional time to pursue the statutory appeal and directing that the High Court&#039;s interim protection continue for that period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468243</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>