<?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 (10) TMI 445 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759846</link>
    <description>HC of Calcutta allowed an appeal with 107-day delay, finding sufficient grounds. The court set aside a previous CGST order, directing the department to reconsider the adjudication without taking coercive action. The writ petition was restored for comprehensive rehearing, highlighting procedural fairness and potential non-application of mind in the original order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 May 2025 17:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=772201" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (10) TMI 445 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759846</link>
      <description>HC of Calcutta allowed an appeal with 107-day delay, finding sufficient grounds. The court set aside a previous CGST order, directing the department to reconsider the adjudication without taking coercive action. The writ petition was restored for comprehensive rehearing, highlighting procedural fairness and potential non-application of mind in the original order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759846</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>