<?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>2011 (8) TMI 1059 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169243</link>
    <description>In departmental appeals, a personal hearing is not an implied requirement of natural justice unless the governing regulation so provides, although notice and hearing are necessary where enhancement of penalty is proposed. The appellate authority may decide the appeal on the record and the grounds raised if the scheme does not mandate oral hearing. An appellate order need not be elaborate, but it must show application of mind and deal with the material contentions raised; a brief order that addresses the challenge and records reasons is not non-speaking. On that basis, the appellate decision was treated as a valid reasoned order, and judicial interference was held unwarranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=381150" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (8) TMI 1059 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169243</link>
      <description>In departmental appeals, a personal hearing is not an implied requirement of natural justice unless the governing regulation so provides, although notice and hearing are necessary where enhancement of penalty is proposed. The appellate authority may decide the appeal on the record and the grounds raised if the scheme does not mandate oral hearing. An appellate order need not be elaborate, but it must show application of mind and deal with the material contentions raised; a brief order that addresses the challenge and records reasons is not non-speaking. On that basis, the appellate decision was treated as a valid reasoned order, and judicial interference was held unwarranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169243</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>