<?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>2025 (5) TMI 920 - MADRAS  HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770648</link>
    <description>The HC examined the rejection of a Rectification Application under Section 161 of the CGST Act. The court found the order legally invalid due to lack of reasoning and absence of hearing. It held that authorities must provide cogent reasons when rejecting such applications and afford the assessee an opportunity to be heard. The impugned order was set aside, with directions to reconsider the application following principles of natural justice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 May 2025 07:48:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=821532" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 920 - MADRAS  HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770648</link>
      <description>The HC examined the rejection of a Rectification Application under Section 161 of the CGST Act. The court found the order legally invalid due to lack of reasoning and absence of hearing. It held that authorities must provide cogent reasons when rejecting such applications and afford the assessee an opportunity to be heard. The impugned order was set aside, with directions to reconsider the application following principles of natural justice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770648</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>