https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357791 Repeated notices, reminders and opportunities to reply or produce documents meant the petitioner could not claim denial of hearing, and the plea of breach of natural justice failed because service was evidenced and no effective participation was made. The court also refused writ relief under Article 226, holding that discretionary and equitable intervention is unavailable where the litigant's conduct shows callousness and lack of diligence, especially when the delay in appeal was substantial and the appellate authorities acted within lawful limits on condonation. The challenge therefore did not succeed and the Revenue's position prevailed. en-us Mon, 26 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Jun 2018 14:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357791 Repeated notices, reminders and opportunities to reply or produce documents meant the petitioner could not claim denial of hearing, and the plea of breach of natural justice failed because service was evidenced and no effective participation was made. The court also refused writ relief under Article 226, holding that discretionary and equitable intervention is unavailable where the litigant's conduct shows callousness and lack of diligence, especially when the delay in appeal was substantial and the appellate authorities acted within lawful limits on condonation. The challenge therefore did not succeed and the Revenue's position prevailed. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 26 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357791