<?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>2026 (1) TMI 1612 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468516</link>
    <description>A writ petition seeking mandamus for issuance of an OTS sanction letter was held not maintainable where the petitioner disputed whether the email communication actually carried the alleged attachment. The court treated the dispute over the missing attachment as a matter unsuitable for writ jurisdiction and indicated that any remedy, if the sanction letter had not been enclosed, lay elsewhere. Relief was therefore declined.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 May 2026 21:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=901118" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (1) TMI 1612 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468516</link>
      <description>A writ petition seeking mandamus for issuance of an OTS sanction letter was held not maintainable where the petitioner disputed whether the email communication actually carried the alleged attachment. The court treated the dispute over the missing attachment as a matter unsuitable for writ jurisdiction and indicated that any remedy, if the sanction letter had not been enclosed, lay elsewhere. Relief was therefore declined.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468516</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>