<?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>1972 (8) TMI 31 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8877</link>
    <description>A statutory appellate tribunal&#039;s wide appellate jurisdiction carries, by necessary implication, incidental or ancillary power to recall an ex parte order and restore an appeal for rehearing where a party was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing or effectively presenting its case, unless the statute expressly bars that course. The absence of an express prohibition means the tribunal may exercise such power to make the appellate remedy effective and ensure a fair hearing. The contrary view that it lacked jurisdiction to consider restoration was therefore unsustainable, and the tribunal could entertain the application for rehearing in an appropriate case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Aug 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 19:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=47917" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (8) TMI 31 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8877</link>
      <description>A statutory appellate tribunal&#039;s wide appellate jurisdiction carries, by necessary implication, incidental or ancillary power to recall an ex parte order and restore an appeal for rehearing where a party was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing or effectively presenting its case, unless the statute expressly bars that course. The absence of an express prohibition means the tribunal may exercise such power to make the appellate remedy effective and ensure a fair hearing. The contrary view that it lacked jurisdiction to consider restoration was therefore unsustainable, and the tribunal could entertain the application for rehearing in an appropriate case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Aug 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8877</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>