<?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 (9) TMI 1988 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=799962</link>
    <description>Overlapping GST demands concerning blocked input tax credit, commission income and reverse-charge freight require fresh determination where the taxpayer asserts that substantially identical liabilities were earlier confirmed and discharged. The impugned assessment was quashed and remitted for adjudication on merits after deposit of the interest and penalty imposed under the earlier assessment, with notice to the taxpayer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2026 10:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=926561" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (9) TMI 1988 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=799962</link>
      <description>Overlapping GST demands concerning blocked input tax credit, commission income and reverse-charge freight require fresh determination where the taxpayer asserts that substantially identical liabilities were earlier confirmed and discharged. The impugned assessment was quashed and remitted for adjudication on merits after deposit of the interest and penalty imposed under the earlier assessment, with notice to the taxpayer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=799962</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>