<?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 (7) TMI 235 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755015</link>
    <description>HC dismissed challenge to CGST adjudication notice, finding no inherent jurisdictional defect. Court upheld petitioner&#039;s procedural rights to cross-examine witnesses, present evidence, and contest documentary allegations. While fact disputes existed, judicial review did not warrant intervention at this preliminary stage, preserving revenue authority&#039;s initial investigative process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 May 2025 10:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=758805" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 235 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755015</link>
      <description>HC dismissed challenge to CGST adjudication notice, finding no inherent jurisdictional defect. Court upheld petitioner&#039;s procedural rights to cross-examine witnesses, present evidence, and contest documentary allegations. While fact disputes existed, judicial review did not warrant intervention at this preliminary stage, preserving revenue authority&#039;s initial investigative process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755015</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>