<?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>2022 (3) TMI 351 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419313</link>
    <description>Pre-show-cause notice consultation under the applicable Board circular was treated as a relevant safeguard against a high-pitch demand notice, and the petitioner made a prima facie case for interim protection when that consultation had not been afforded. The later circular was read as not excluding such consultation altogether and, at the interim stage, as not expressing any retrospective operation. The Court noted that a benefit available under a statute, circular, or notification is not ordinarily taken away retrospectively unless that intention is expressly stated. The respondents were restrained from proceeding further on the impugned notice until disposal of the writ petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2025 11:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=672275" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (3) TMI 351 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419313</link>
      <description>Pre-show-cause notice consultation under the applicable Board circular was treated as a relevant safeguard against a high-pitch demand notice, and the petitioner made a prima facie case for interim protection when that consultation had not been afforded. The later circular was read as not excluding such consultation altogether and, at the interim stage, as not expressing any retrospective operation. The Court noted that a benefit available under a statute, circular, or notification is not ordinarily taken away retrospectively unless that intention is expressly stated. The respondents were restrained from proceeding further on the impugned notice until disposal of the writ petition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419313</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>