<?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 (5) TMI 120 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790918</link>
    <description>An ex parte tax adjudication order concerning alleged wrongful availment of input tax credit was set aside because the affected party had not been given a meaningful opportunity to reply to the show-cause notice. The matter was remitted for fresh consideration on merits, with permission to file a reply and contest the allegations, including the claimed non-transfer of goods. Consequential recovery attachment was also set aside, and all contentions were kept open for reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 May 2026 07:40:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=899540" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 120 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790918</link>
      <description>An ex parte tax adjudication order concerning alleged wrongful availment of input tax credit was set aside because the affected party had not been given a meaningful opportunity to reply to the show-cause notice. The matter was remitted for fresh consideration on merits, with permission to file a reply and contest the allegations, including the claimed non-transfer of goods. Consequential recovery attachment was also set aside, and all contentions were kept open for reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790918</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>