<?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>1982 (12) TMI 170 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153704</link>
    <description>Fresh evidence could not be relied upon suo motu by the appellate authority unless the conditions in regulation 17 of the Assam Board of Revenue Regulations, 1963 were satisfied, including necessity for deciding the appeal and an opportunity for the opposite party to rebut it. The Inspector of Taxes&#039; report had not been tendered by any party and was used for the first time by the Board without following those safeguards. Because the report formed the basis of the finding against the assessee and no chance was given to contest it or lead rebuttal evidence, the resulting order was unsustainable for breach of natural justice and non-compliance with the regulation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Jul 2013 12:49:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170739" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (12) TMI 170 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153704</link>
      <description>Fresh evidence could not be relied upon suo motu by the appellate authority unless the conditions in regulation 17 of the Assam Board of Revenue Regulations, 1963 were satisfied, including necessity for deciding the appeal and an opportunity for the opposite party to rebut it. The Inspector of Taxes&#039; report had not been tendered by any party and was used for the first time by the Board without following those safeguards. Because the report formed the basis of the finding against the assessee and no chance was given to contest it or lead rebuttal evidence, the resulting order was unsustainable for breach of natural justice and non-compliance with the regulation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153704</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>