<?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>1995 (4) TMI 176 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84396</link>
    <description>Dispatch of the hearing notice and dismissal order by registered post, supported by the outward register, raised the statutory presumption of service under Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act. That presumption was rebuttable, but a bare denial was insufficient; the correspondence relied on did not displace service of the hearing notice fixed for 13-2-1991. As the applicant failed to rebut service, the request to set aside the dismissal and restore the appeal was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Apr 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2011 16:44:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121540" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (4) TMI 176 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84396</link>
      <description>Dispatch of the hearing notice and dismissal order by registered post, supported by the outward register, raised the statutory presumption of service under Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act. That presumption was rebuttable, but a bare denial was insufficient; the correspondence relied on did not displace service of the hearing notice fixed for 13-2-1991. As the applicant failed to rebut service, the request to set aside the dismissal and restore the appeal was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Apr 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84396</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>