<?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 (10) TMI 121 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800178</link>
    <description>Duplicate service-tax demands arising from two show-cause notices issued on the same date for the same tax period required verification because separate orders may have confirmed identical liability. As the related demand order was already under statutory appeal, the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication to determine whether the demands overlapped, after providing an opportunity to submit a reply and be heard.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2026 09:32:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=927724" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (10) TMI 121 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800178</link>
      <description>Duplicate service-tax demands arising from two show-cause notices issued on the same date for the same tax period required verification because separate orders may have confirmed identical liability. As the related demand order was already under statutory appeal, the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication to determine whether the demands overlapped, after providing an opportunity to submit a reply and be heard.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800178</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>