<?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 1435 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760836</link>
    <description>Orders disposing of show cause notices solely for non-filing of a reply were liable to interference where the affected party had not been given a proper opportunity to respond. The Delhi High Court noted that denial of a chance to submit a reply before adjudication required reconsideration of the notices. The impugned orders were set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication after granting two weeks to file a reply and affording an opportunity of personal hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 May 2025 19:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=775850" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (10) TMI 1435 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760836</link>
      <description>Orders disposing of show cause notices solely for non-filing of a reply were liable to interference where the affected party had not been given a proper opportunity to respond. The Delhi High Court noted that denial of a chance to submit a reply before adjudication required reconsideration of the notices. The impugned orders were set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication after granting two weeks to file a reply and affording an opportunity of personal hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760836</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>