<?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>2024 (6) TMI 162 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753555</link>
    <description>The Allahabad HC held that despite Section 75(4) of the Act mandating opportunity of hearing, the show cause notice violated natural justice principles by failing to specify date, place, and time for hearing. The court distinguished between opportunity of hearing and personal hearing, noting the legislature&#039;s deliberate choice of language. However, applying statutory interpretation principles that all sections must be read together and no provision rendered otiose, the court found the word &quot;personal&quot; was erroneously omitted from the drafting. The matter was remitted to the proper officer to provide personal hearing opportunity and pass fresh orders accordingly. Petition allowed by way of remand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Jun 2024 11:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=755362" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (6) TMI 162 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753555</link>
      <description>The Allahabad HC held that despite Section 75(4) of the Act mandating opportunity of hearing, the show cause notice violated natural justice principles by failing to specify date, place, and time for hearing. The court distinguished between opportunity of hearing and personal hearing, noting the legislature&#039;s deliberate choice of language. However, applying statutory interpretation principles that all sections must be read together and no provision rendered otiose, the court found the word &quot;personal&quot; was erroneously omitted from the drafting. The matter was remitted to the proper officer to provide personal hearing opportunity and pass fresh orders accordingly. Petition allowed by way of remand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753555</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>