<?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 (11) TMI 106 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761120</link>
    <description>An assessment order passed before the time granted to the assessee for filing a reply expires breaches the principles of natural justice because it denies a fair hearing. A subsequent rejection of an appeal as time-barred does not cure that original defect or validate the assessment. The writ court therefore treated the earlier procedural lapse as decisive and directed fresh adjudication after giving the assessee an effective opportunity to be heard.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2025 21:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=776492" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 106 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761120</link>
      <description>An assessment order passed before the time granted to the assessee for filing a reply expires breaches the principles of natural justice because it denies a fair hearing. A subsequent rejection of an appeal as time-barred does not cure that original defect or validate the assessment. The writ court therefore treated the earlier procedural lapse as decisive and directed fresh adjudication after giving the assessee an effective opportunity to be heard.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761120</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>