<?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>2010 (12) TMI 489 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204892</link>
    <description>An adjudication based on witness statements must comply with natural justice where those statements are relied upon to impose civil consequences, and cross-examination is an essential safeguard when requested or otherwise required by fairness. The commentary emphasises that the Tribunal should have examined whether the original authority relied on such testimony, whether the appellant was afforded an opportunity to cross-examine, and whether that grievance had been addressed. Failure to deal with that complaint rendered the order unsustainable, and the matter required reconsideration with proper inquiry into the use of witness evidence and, if necessary, provision for cross-examination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 May 2011 16:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=178420" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (12) TMI 489 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204892</link>
      <description>An adjudication based on witness statements must comply with natural justice where those statements are relied upon to impose civil consequences, and cross-examination is an essential safeguard when requested or otherwise required by fairness. The commentary emphasises that the Tribunal should have examined whether the original authority relied on such testimony, whether the appellant was afforded an opportunity to cross-examine, and whether that grievance had been addressed. Failure to deal with that complaint rendered the order unsustainable, and the matter required reconsideration with proper inquiry into the use of witness evidence and, if necessary, provision for cross-examination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204892</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>