https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776368 The HC found that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt regarding the service of notices under section 73, as the impugned order was not visible under the designated portal tab. Considering unresolved issues about whether all replies and annexures were properly displayed and considered, the court declined to call for further affidavits or delay by invoking statutory remedies. Since the disputed amount was deposited with the State, no outstanding demand existed. The petition was disposed of with directions for the petitioner to treat the impugned order as final, submit a written reply within two weeks, and for the assessing officer to issue a fresh notice with at least fifteen days' clear notice. en-us Fri, 18 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Aug 2025 05:20:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776368 The HC found that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of doubt regarding the service of notices under section 73, as the impugned order was not visible under the designated portal tab. Considering unresolved issues about whether all replies and annexures were properly displayed and considered, the court declined to call for further affidavits or delay by invoking statutory remedies. Since the disputed amount was deposited with the State, no outstanding demand existed. The petition was disposed of with directions for the petitioner to treat the impugned order as final, submit a written reply within two weeks, and for the assessing officer to issue a fresh notice with at least fifteen days' clear notice. Case-Laws GST Fri, 18 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776368