<?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>2015 (4) TMI 66 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258184</link>
    <description>The court found the ex post facto extension of the investigation period granted by the Central Government to be valid. However, it held that the petitioners were not given an adequate opportunity of hearing by the Designated Authority before issuing the Final Finding. As a result, the Final Finding dated 09.06.2014 was quashed due to a violation of the principles of natural justice, and the writ petitions were allowed in part with each party bearing their own costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2015 18:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=380279" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 66 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258184</link>
      <description>The court found the ex post facto extension of the investigation period granted by the Central Government to be valid. However, it held that the petitioners were not given an adequate opportunity of hearing by the Designated Authority before issuing the Final Finding. As a result, the Final Finding dated 09.06.2014 was quashed due to a violation of the principles of natural justice, and the writ petitions were allowed in part with each party bearing their own costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258184</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>