<?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>2022 (7) TMI 1585 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461187</link>
    <description>Writ interference with a show cause notice was declined because the objections raised turned on disputed facts, including alleged suppression or misstatement and whether the underlying service was exempt. The court treated limitation and exemption as matters requiring factual determination by the notice-issuing authority, not issues suitable for writ review at the notice stage. On that basis, the challenge to the notice was rejected and the notice was left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2025 10:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=807513" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (7) TMI 1585 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461187</link>
      <description>Writ interference with a show cause notice was declined because the objections raised turned on disputed facts, including alleged suppression or misstatement and whether the underlying service was exempt. The court treated limitation and exemption as matters requiring factual determination by the notice-issuing authority, not issues suitable for writ review at the notice stage. On that basis, the challenge to the notice was rejected and the notice was left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461187</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>