<?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 (5) TMI 1646 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792444</link>
    <description>A writ petition challenging cancellation of GST registration was directed to be pursued through the statutory appeal remedy rather than in writ jurisdiction. The petitioner was permitted to file an appeal within two weeks, and limitation was directed not to stand in the way of the appeal being entertained. The order also required deposit of costs as a condition for the relief granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 May 2026 08:21:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=904162" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 1646 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792444</link>
      <description>A writ petition challenging cancellation of GST registration was directed to be pursued through the statutory appeal remedy rather than in writ jurisdiction. The petitioner was permitted to file an appeal within two weeks, and limitation was directed not to stand in the way of the appeal being entertained. The order also required deposit of costs as a condition for the relief granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792444</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>