https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240219 The Tribunal upheld the competency of the adjudicating authority to decide the matter despite previous involvement in sending a report. The request for cross-examination post-adjudication was dismissed for not being raised earlier. The Tribunal considered an RTI Act application filed after the adjudication order but left the decision on whether to adjudicate the matter or appoint another authority to the Commissioner. The Tribunal denied stay applications and appeals, stressing the importance of fair and timely actions in legal proceedings for a transparent and effective adjudication process, emphasizing procedural integrity and adherence to legal principles. en-us Thu, 27 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Feb 2016 17:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240219 The Tribunal upheld the competency of the adjudicating authority to decide the matter despite previous involvement in sending a report. The request for cross-examination post-adjudication was dismissed for not being raised earlier. The Tribunal considered an RTI Act application filed after the adjudication order but left the decision on whether to adjudicate the matter or appoint another authority to the Commissioner. The Tribunal denied stay applications and appeals, stressing the importance of fair and timely actions in legal proceedings for a transparent and effective adjudication process, emphasizing procedural integrity and adherence to legal principles. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 27 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240219