<?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 (7) TMI 442 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794556</link>
    <description>An adjudication order under the WBGST/CGST regime was unsustainable where the show-cause notice did not specify a date for personal hearing and no effective hearing was granted before an adverse decision, contrary to section 75(4). The Calcutta HC held that the statutory right to be heard, reinforced by natural justice, had been violated. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication on merits after giving the taxpayer an opportunity of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2026 08:39:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=910429" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 442 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794556</link>
      <description>An adjudication order under the WBGST/CGST regime was unsustainable where the show-cause notice did not specify a date for personal hearing and no effective hearing was granted before an adverse decision, contrary to section 75(4). The Calcutta HC held that the statutory right to be heard, reinforced by natural justice, had been violated. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication on merits after giving the taxpayer an opportunity of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794556</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>