<?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 (10) TMI 788 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800845</link>
    <description>GST adjudication under Section 74 raised a prima facie procedural concern where the order was allegedly uploaded only under the Additional Notice and Orders tab, without separate intimation and without a post-reply hearing. No determination was made on the underlying tax demand or alleged statutory breaches. The adjudication order was set aside for fresh, reasoned adjudication after consideration of the reply and an opportunity of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2026 04:18:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=929220" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (10) TMI 788 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800845</link>
      <description>GST adjudication under Section 74 raised a prima facie procedural concern where the order was allegedly uploaded only under the Additional Notice and Orders tab, without separate intimation and without a post-reply hearing. No determination was made on the underlying tax demand or alleged statutory breaches. The adjudication order was set aside for fresh, reasoned adjudication after consideration of the reply and an opportunity of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800845</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>