<?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 (8) TMI 298 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796425</link>
    <description>Assessment and demand orders were challenged because an assessment for 2019-20 included turnovers from March and April 2021 and March 2022, while the same demands were separately raised for April 2021 to March 2022. The material indicated duplication across tax periods and lack of application of mind. The orders were set aside, while permitting the Assessing Authority to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2026 08:48:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=915394" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (8) TMI 298 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796425</link>
      <description>Assessment and demand orders were challenged because an assessment for 2019-20 included turnovers from March and April 2021 and March 2022, while the same demands were separately raised for April 2021 to March 2022. The material indicated duplication across tax periods and lack of application of mind. The orders were set aside, while permitting the Assessing Authority to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796425</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>