<?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>1993 (2) TMI 210 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82980</link>
    <description>In ex parte customs adjudication, inadequate time to answer the show cause notice and to prepare for personal hearing, especially where relied-upon documents were voluminous and repeated requests for adjournment were made, was treated as a breach of natural justice. The record indicated that the opportunity granted was unreasonable in the circumstances, particularly when the department had itself taken significant time to issue the notice and supply documents. The proper course was fresh adjudication after giving a fair opportunity, and the reply already filed was to be considered in those proceedings; the confiscation, penalty and duty demands were therefore set aside for reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2011 17:16:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120125" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (2) TMI 210 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82980</link>
      <description>In ex parte customs adjudication, inadequate time to answer the show cause notice and to prepare for personal hearing, especially where relied-upon documents were voluminous and repeated requests for adjournment were made, was treated as a breach of natural justice. The record indicated that the opportunity granted was unreasonable in the circumstances, particularly when the department had itself taken significant time to issue the notice and supply documents. The proper course was fresh adjudication after giving a fair opportunity, and the reply already filed was to be considered in those proceedings; the confiscation, penalty and duty demands were therefore set aside for reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82980</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>