<?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>HC: Lack of communication violated natural justice in a tax case. Petitioner to be granted opportunity to respond.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=77814</link>
    <description>The Delhi High Court examined the validity of an order issued u/s 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, concerning lack of communication of notice to the petitioner, leading to a violation of principles of natural justice. The impugned order indicated that the taxpayer did not respond or appear in person, resulting in an ex-parte demand being created. The court noted that despite providing opportunities for a reply and a personal hearing, the taxpayer remained silent. The court held that the petitioner should be given a chance to respond to the Show Cause Notice, and the matter should be re-adjudicated. The petition was disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 25 May 2024 08:46:54 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2024 08:46:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=754299" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>HC: Lack of communication violated natural justice in a tax case. Petitioner to be granted opportunity to respond.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=77814</link>
      <description>The Delhi High Court examined the validity of an order issued u/s 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, concerning lack of communication of notice to the petitioner, leading to a violation of principles of natural justice. The impugned order indicated that the taxpayer did not respond or appear in person, resulting in an ex-parte demand being created. The court noted that despite providing opportunities for a reply and a personal hearing, the taxpayer remained silent. The court held that the petitioner should be given a chance to respond to the Show Cause Notice, and the matter should be re-adjudicated. The petition was disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 25 May 2024 08:46:54 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=77814</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>