<?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 918 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770646</link>
    <description>Reconciliation of tax credit and TDS deposited under the wrong GSTIN required a fresh adjudication because the assessee had not been given an effective opportunity to present its case. The court noted that additional documents could be considered for a comprehensive determination, so the demand order could not be sustained on the existing record. The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remitted to the adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication after hearing the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Jun 2025 12:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=821534" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 918 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770646</link>
      <description>Reconciliation of tax credit and TDS deposited under the wrong GSTIN required a fresh adjudication because the assessee had not been given an effective opportunity to present its case. The court noted that additional documents could be considered for a comprehensive determination, so the demand order could not be sustained on the existing record. The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remitted to the adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication after hearing the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770646</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>