<?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 (7) TMI 1196 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775128</link>
    <description>The Calcutta HC dismissed an appeal challenging disallowance of Input Tax Credit (ITC). The adjudicating authority issued three notices for personal hearing on 17th January, 31st January, and 15th February 2024, but the appellant failed to appear. The HC held this was not a violation of natural justice principles since adequate opportunity was provided but not utilized by the appellant. The court found the appellant, being in business for over 19 years, was well-versed with taxation law requirements and statutory procedures. The HC ruled the appellant was not justified in bypassing the statutory appellate remedy and should have filed a statutory appeal before the appellate authority first. The Single Bench correctly relegated the appellant to pursue the proper statutory appeal process. Appeal dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2025 08:25:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=837182" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 1196 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775128</link>
      <description>The Calcutta HC dismissed an appeal challenging disallowance of Input Tax Credit (ITC). The adjudicating authority issued three notices for personal hearing on 17th January, 31st January, and 15th February 2024, but the appellant failed to appear. The HC held this was not a violation of natural justice principles since adequate opportunity was provided but not utilized by the appellant. The court found the appellant, being in business for over 19 years, was well-versed with taxation law requirements and statutory procedures. The HC ruled the appellant was not justified in bypassing the statutory appellate remedy and should have filed a statutory appeal before the appellate authority first. The Single Bench correctly relegated the appellant to pursue the proper statutory appeal process. Appeal dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775128</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>