<?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>2018 (12) TMI 784 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372015</link>
    <description>CESTAT Kolkata held that an adjudication cannot sustain findings or liabilities that go beyond the show cause notice. The notice was issued against a partnership concern, but the adjudicating authority treated the appellant as a sole proprietor without notice on that issue and without giving her a proper opportunity to be heard. That departure from the scope of the notice violated natural justice, so the impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after a reasonable hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2018 06:35:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=547087" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 784 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372015</link>
      <description>CESTAT Kolkata held that an adjudication cannot sustain findings or liabilities that go beyond the show cause notice. The notice was issued against a partnership concern, but the adjudicating authority treated the appellant as a sole proprietor without notice on that issue and without giving her a proper opportunity to be heard. That departure from the scope of the notice violated natural justice, so the impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after a reasonable hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372015</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>