<?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 583 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800640</link>
    <description>Final approval of a corporate resolution plan governed a fiscal demand for which the relevant authority had not filed any claim during insolvency proceedings. Departmental appeals concerning that unasserted demand remained subject to the plan&#039;s finality, and the substantial questions of law raised in those appeals were left unanswered. The approved plan therefore operated as the controlling framework for treatment of the fiscal demand despite the pending departmental appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2026 18:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=928789" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (10) TMI 583 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800640</link>
      <description>Final approval of a corporate resolution plan governed a fiscal demand for which the relevant authority had not filed any claim during insolvency proceedings. Departmental appeals concerning that unasserted demand remained subject to the plan&#039;s finality, and the substantial questions of law raised in those appeals were left unanswered. The approved plan therefore operated as the controlling framework for treatment of the fiscal demand despite the pending departmental appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800640</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>