<?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>1999 (4) TMI 195 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90964</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals by remanding the case to the Commissioner for fresh adjudication. It emphasized procedural fairness and the appellants&#039; right to access and respond to technical expert reports influencing the determination of their annual production capacities. The failure to provide the technical report by Shri G.D. Srivastava before determining the annual capacity was deemed a violation of natural justice, leading to the setting aside of the initial order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:10:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128026" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (4) TMI 195 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90964</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals by remanding the case to the Commissioner for fresh adjudication. It emphasized procedural fairness and the appellants&#039; right to access and respond to technical expert reports influencing the determination of their annual production capacities. The failure to provide the technical report by Shri G.D. Srivastava before determining the annual capacity was deemed a violation of natural justice, leading to the setting aside of the initial order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Apr 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90964</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>