https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756818 Section 73(4B)(d) was treated as directory in the circumstances, and delay caused during the pandemic was accepted as sufficiently explained. The writ challenge was not examined on merits because the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appellate remedy, with liberty to seek exclusion of the time spent in writ proceedings. The document also notes that repeated notices for personal hearing had been issued, and the petitioner relied on the same pandemic period for non-appearance. en-us Wed, 31 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Aug 2024 21:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756818 Section 73(4B)(d) was treated as directory in the circumstances, and delay caused during the pandemic was accepted as sufficiently explained. The writ challenge was not examined on merits because the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appellate remedy, with liberty to seek exclusion of the time spent in writ proceedings. The document also notes that repeated notices for personal hearing had been issued, and the petitioner relied on the same pandemic period for non-appearance. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 31 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756818