<?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 (3) TMI 571 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106552</link>
    <description>An adjudication order is vulnerable where parties are not given a fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing. Short notice of about 48 hours, coupled with uncertainty whether all noticees were served, was treated as unreasonable in a long-pending matter involving substantial demand and penalties. The proceeding was therefore conducted without adequate opportunity for the appellants to present their case, and the order was held unsustainable for breach of natural justice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2012 16:52:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=143572" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (3) TMI 571 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106552</link>
      <description>An adjudication order is vulnerable where parties are not given a fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing. Short notice of about 48 hours, coupled with uncertainty whether all noticees were served, was treated as unreasonable in a long-pending matter involving substantial demand and penalties. The proceeding was therefore conducted without adequate opportunity for the appellants to present their case, and the order was held unsustainable for breach of natural justice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106552</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>