<?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>2018 (1) TMI 1164 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354428</link>
    <description>A remission claim cannot be finally rejected without observance of natural justice and proper consideration of the claimant&#039;s documentary evidence. The text notes that the fire incident was undisputed, the department had been informed, and supporting documents were submitted, yet the adjudicating authority passed the order after years without a show cause notice or personal hearing. It further records that the appellant&#039;s materials, including a chartered accountant&#039;s certificate on the insurance claim, were not properly considered. The rejection was therefore unsustainable and the matter required fresh adjudication after a fair opportunity of defence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2018 16:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=506366" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 1164 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354428</link>
      <description>A remission claim cannot be finally rejected without observance of natural justice and proper consideration of the claimant&#039;s documentary evidence. The text notes that the fire incident was undisputed, the department had been informed, and supporting documents were submitted, yet the adjudicating authority passed the order after years without a show cause notice or personal hearing. It further records that the appellant&#039;s materials, including a chartered accountant&#039;s certificate on the insurance claim, were not properly considered. The rejection was therefore unsustainable and the matter required fresh adjudication after a fair opportunity of defence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354428</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>