<?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>2000 (1) TMI 683 - CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99706</link>
    <description>A disciplinary finding cannot be sustained when the authority ignores the employee&#039;s specific defence, shifts to a basis different from the charge framed, or relies on no credible evidence. In the first charge, the defence on Modvat verification was not dealt with and the reasoning moved to a different alleged omission, so the finding was unsustainable. In the second charge, the replies on pending work and subsequent action were not specifically examined, and the penalty was based on general conclusions without adequate material. The disciplinary order was quashed, with consequential service benefits, including consideration for promotion in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 13:28:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136758" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (1) TMI 683 - CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99706</link>
      <description>A disciplinary finding cannot be sustained when the authority ignores the employee&#039;s specific defence, shifts to a basis different from the charge framed, or relies on no credible evidence. In the first charge, the defence on Modvat verification was not dealt with and the reasoning moved to a different alleged omission, so the finding was unsustainable. In the second charge, the replies on pending work and subsequent action were not specifically examined, and the penalty was based on general conclusions without adequate material. The disciplinary order was quashed, with consequential service benefits, including consideration for promotion in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99706</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>