<?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 793 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800850</link>
    <description>Challenges to adjudication orders were required to be pursued through statutory appeals. The validity of service through the Common Portal remained unadjudicated because the operation and effect of earlier precedent on that issue had been stayed by the Supreme Court. Petitioners could file appeals within the stipulated period, and appellate authorities could not object on limitation if the required statutory deposit was made.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2026 08:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=929484" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (10) TMI 793 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800850</link>
      <description>Challenges to adjudication orders were required to be pursued through statutory appeals. The validity of service through the Common Portal remained unadjudicated because the operation and effect of earlier precedent on that issue had been stayed by the Supreme Court. Petitioners could file appeals within the stipulated period, and appellate authorities could not object on limitation if the required statutory deposit was made.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800850</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>