<?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 1354 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771082</link>
    <description>The HC examined a GST registration cancellation appeal involving procedural and natural justice issues. The Court found that non-service of Show Cause Notice prevented the limitation period from commencing. Exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226, the HC set aside the limitation bar, directed the appeal be heard on merits, and imposed a Rs. 20,000 cost. The ruling emphasized that statutory limitation begins only upon proper communication of an order to the concerned party.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Jun 2025 18:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=822841" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 1354 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771082</link>
      <description>The HC examined a GST registration cancellation appeal involving procedural and natural justice issues. The Court found that non-service of Show Cause Notice prevented the limitation period from commencing. Exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226, the HC set aside the limitation bar, directed the appeal be heard on merits, and imposed a Rs. 20,000 cost. The ruling emphasized that statutory limitation begins only upon proper communication of an order to the concerned party.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771082</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>