<?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>1983 (11) TMI 322 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166894</link>
    <description>Where a statute creates liability and provides a complete adjudicatory and appellate scheme, civil court jurisdiction is excluded by necessary implication except for limited inquiry into competence, statutory preconditions, procedure, reasonable opportunity and jurisdictional legality. Disclosure of the relied-upon statement through the notice and reply stage, without any request for cross-examination, was treated as sufficient compliance with natural justice, so non-examination of that witness did not by itself vitiate the adjudication. The civil court could not reappreciate the merits of the penalty order or sit in appeal over the statutory finding.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2014 14:35:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=368648" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (11) TMI 322 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166894</link>
      <description>Where a statute creates liability and provides a complete adjudicatory and appellate scheme, civil court jurisdiction is excluded by necessary implication except for limited inquiry into competence, statutory preconditions, procedure, reasonable opportunity and jurisdictional legality. Disclosure of the relied-upon statement through the notice and reply stage, without any request for cross-examination, was treated as sufficient compliance with natural justice, so non-examination of that witness did not by itself vitiate the adjudication. The civil court could not reappreciate the merits of the penalty order or sit in appeal over the statutory finding.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166894</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>