<?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>2012 (4) TMI 174 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211882</link>
    <description>Disciplinary enquiries under the Chartered Accountants Act and the 2007 Rules must comply with natural justice by giving a fair and effective opportunity to defend. The commentary explains that delay in supplying transcripts and relied-upon exhibits can prejudice cross-examination and amount to denial of an effective hearing, while mere non-participation after due notice may not support that grievance. It also states that the existence of an alternate statutory appeal does not bar writ interference where breach of natural justice and resulting prejudice are shown. The result discussed is remand for a fresh enquiry with limited cross-examination on specified conditions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Apr 2012 09:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185299" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (4) TMI 174 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211882</link>
      <description>Disciplinary enquiries under the Chartered Accountants Act and the 2007 Rules must comply with natural justice by giving a fair and effective opportunity to defend. The commentary explains that delay in supplying transcripts and relied-upon exhibits can prejudice cross-examination and amount to denial of an effective hearing, while mere non-participation after due notice may not support that grievance. It also states that the existence of an alternate statutory appeal does not bar writ interference where breach of natural justice and resulting prejudice are shown. The result discussed is remand for a fresh enquiry with limited cross-examination on specified conditions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211882</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>