<?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 (3) TMI 1580 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788825</link>
    <description>An order passed before the scheduled hearing date, despite notice calling for appearance and supporting representation, breaches natural justice where the party is not given an opportunity to reply or be heard. On that footing, such an order cannot be sustained. The proper course is to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the authority for fresh adjudication after granting a hearing, ensuring compliance with the procedural safeguard of audi alteram partem.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2026 08:57:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=893446" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (3) TMI 1580 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788825</link>
      <description>An order passed before the scheduled hearing date, despite notice calling for appearance and supporting representation, breaches natural justice where the party is not given an opportunity to reply or be heard. On that footing, such an order cannot be sustained. The proper course is to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the authority for fresh adjudication after granting a hearing, ensuring compliance with the procedural safeguard of audi alteram partem.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788825</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>