<?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>2002 (8) TMI 365 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102823</link>
    <description>An order communicated without granting the affected parties a hearing was treated as contrary to natural justice. As the absence of an opportunity to be heard was undisputed, the matter required fresh adjudication by the authority concerned. The appeals were remanded for de novo consideration with directions to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing and to pass a speaking order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 13:17:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139869" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (8) TMI 365 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102823</link>
      <description>An order communicated without granting the affected parties a hearing was treated as contrary to natural justice. As the absence of an opportunity to be heard was undisputed, the matter required fresh adjudication by the authority concerned. The appeals were remanded for de novo consideration with directions to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing and to pass a speaking order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102823</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>