<?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>2026 (2) TMI 995 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786847</link>
    <description>Where a taxpayer&#039;s GST registration had been cancelled, reliance solely on uploading statutory notices to the GST common portal was held not to constitute valid service under Section 169 because the statutory scheme contemplates multiple service modes and a cancelled registrant is not obliged to monitor the portal; service must in practice communicate the notice to the addressee. Separately, adjudication without granting the opportunity of personal hearing breached the audi alteram partem principle as required by Section 75(4). Consequentially the impugned adjudication was quashed and the revenue permitted to issue fresh notice and proceed with valid service and a hearing if requested.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2026 17:16:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=887228" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (2) TMI 995 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786847</link>
      <description>Where a taxpayer&#039;s GST registration had been cancelled, reliance solely on uploading statutory notices to the GST common portal was held not to constitute valid service under Section 169 because the statutory scheme contemplates multiple service modes and a cancelled registrant is not obliged to monitor the portal; service must in practice communicate the notice to the addressee. Separately, adjudication without granting the opportunity of personal hearing breached the audi alteram partem principle as required by Section 75(4). Consequentially the impugned adjudication was quashed and the revenue permitted to issue fresh notice and proceed with valid service and a hearing if requested.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786847</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>