<?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>Rectification order dated 28 June 2024 annulled for lack of reasons and denial of personal hearing, writ disposed</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91975</link>
    <description>HC set aside the Rectification Order dated 28 June 2024 and disposed of the writ petition. The Court found the impugned rectification order to be mechanical, lacking reasons and failing to apply the principle of natural justice by not affording a personal hearing when the order adversely affected the assessee. Although the petitioner filed a reply and attributed delay to a dispute with a GST consultant, the delay in challenging the December 2023 order was inadequately explained and did not justify condonation; the petitioner had the opportunity to file submissions. Nevertheless, because the rectification was issued without reasoned assessment or hearing, the HC annulled that rectification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2025 08:41:03 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2025 08:41:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=846141" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Rectification order dated 28 June 2024 annulled for lack of reasons and denial of personal hearing, writ disposed</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91975</link>
      <description>HC set aside the Rectification Order dated 28 June 2024 and disposed of the writ petition. The Court found the impugned rectification order to be mechanical, lacking reasons and failing to apply the principle of natural justice by not affording a personal hearing when the order adversely affected the assessee. Although the petitioner filed a reply and attributed delay to a dispute with a GST consultant, the delay in challenging the December 2023 order was inadequately explained and did not justify condonation; the petitioner had the opportunity to file submissions. Nevertheless, because the rectification was issued without reasoned assessment or hearing, the HC annulled that rectification.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2025 08:41:03 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91975</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>