https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458405 The impugned order was treated as the final notice because there was a dispute over whether it had been properly communicated on the assessee portal and whether the assessee had been able to respond effectively within limitation. The Court also noted controversy over whether the assessee's replies and annexures were placed before the assessing officer. As no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending or directing recourse to the statutory remedy, and since the disputed amount had already been deposited with no outstanding demand remaining, the writ petition was disposed of with directions for fresh consideration. The assessee was allowed to file a written reply within two weeks, after which the assessing officer was to issue fresh notice with at least fifteen days' clear time and pass a reasoned speaking order within one month. en-us Mon, 22 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 May 2025 16:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458405 The impugned order was treated as the final notice because there was a dispute over whether it had been properly communicated on the assessee portal and whether the assessee had been able to respond effectively within limitation. The Court also noted controversy over whether the assessee's replies and annexures were placed before the assessing officer. As no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending or directing recourse to the statutory remedy, and since the disputed amount had already been deposited with no outstanding demand remaining, the writ petition was disposed of with directions for fresh consideration. The assessee was allowed to file a written reply within two weeks, after which the assessing officer was to issue fresh notice with at least fifteen days' clear time and pass a reasoned speaking order within one month. Case-Laws GST Mon, 22 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458405