<?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>1996 (5) TMI 435 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199940</link>
    <description>The statutory scheme distinguished preliminary verification from regular investigation, treating the former as a confidential screening stage to assess whether a complaint disclosed a prima facie basis for further action. An opportunity of hearing was held to arise at the regular investigation stage, not at the preliminary stage. The power to submit a report was construed to include an interim recommendation where necessary to support an effective inquiry and prevent interference with records or investigation. On that construction, the absence of prior notice or hearing did not invalidate the interim report, and the recommendation for suspension or transfer was within power.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2025 15:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512848" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (5) TMI 435 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199940</link>
      <description>The statutory scheme distinguished preliminary verification from regular investigation, treating the former as a confidential screening stage to assess whether a complaint disclosed a prima facie basis for further action. An opportunity of hearing was held to arise at the regular investigation stage, not at the preliminary stage. The power to submit a report was construed to include an interim recommendation where necessary to support an effective inquiry and prevent interference with records or investigation. On that construction, the absence of prior notice or hearing did not invalidate the interim report, and the recommendation for suspension or transfer was within power.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199940</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>