<?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>Natural justice in GST adjudication: ex parte order on factual discrepancies set aside, with fresh hearing directed.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98895</link>
    <description>HC set aside an ex parte adjudication under Section 73 where the show cause notice raised factual disputes on return mismatches, excess input tax credit, supplier default, delayed tax payment and related interest. It held that the petitioner had to be heard on merits before such discrepancies were decided, especially where the petitioner claimed material existed to rebut the alleged defaults. Because allowing the order to stand would cause serious financial prejudice, the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication after affording an opportunity to respond, and the consequential bank attachment was directed to be withdrawn.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 08:21:23 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 08:21:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=897104" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Natural justice in GST adjudication: ex parte order on factual discrepancies set aside, with fresh hearing directed.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98895</link>
      <description>HC set aside an ex parte adjudication under Section 73 where the show cause notice raised factual disputes on return mismatches, excess input tax credit, supplier default, delayed tax payment and related interest. It held that the petitioner had to be heard on merits before such discrepancies were decided, especially where the petitioner claimed material existed to rebut the alleged defaults. Because allowing the order to stand would cause serious financial prejudice, the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication after affording an opportunity to respond, and the consequential bank attachment was directed to be withdrawn.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 08:21:23 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98895</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>