<?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 (10) TMI 543 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779747</link>
    <description>HC found that the adjudicating authority passed the impugned order without hearing the petitioner after refusing adjournments, raising natural justice concerns. Although the limitation for appeal had expired and the petitioner did not promptly seek a certified copy, the HC permitted the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, directing that the appeal be filed by 30 November 2025.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2025 09:01:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=857723" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (10) TMI 543 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779747</link>
      <description>HC found that the adjudicating authority passed the impugned order without hearing the petitioner after refusing adjournments, raising natural justice concerns. Although the limitation for appeal had expired and the petitioner did not promptly seek a certified copy, the HC permitted the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, directing that the appeal be filed by 30 November 2025.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779747</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>