<?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>2021 (10) TMI 198 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413146</link>
    <description>Violation of natural justice can justify writ intervention despite an alternate remedy where the adjudicating process denies a fair hearing. Here, the notice fixed three hearing dates in advance, although the governing circular required sufficient interval and separate opportunities for hearing or extension. Time had been granted to produce the Bank Realization Certificate, but the order-in-original was passed before that deadline, and the later negative statement also showed the material needed verification. The matter therefore fell within the recognised exception to the alternate-remedy rule. The writ appeal was allowed, the dismissal and order-in-original were set aside, and the case was remanded for fresh adjudication after personal hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Oct 2021 08:44:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=657715" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (10) TMI 198 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413146</link>
      <description>Violation of natural justice can justify writ intervention despite an alternate remedy where the adjudicating process denies a fair hearing. Here, the notice fixed three hearing dates in advance, although the governing circular required sufficient interval and separate opportunities for hearing or extension. Time had been granted to produce the Bank Realization Certificate, but the order-in-original was passed before that deadline, and the later negative statement also showed the material needed verification. The matter therefore fell within the recognised exception to the alternate-remedy rule. The writ appeal was allowed, the dismissal and order-in-original were set aside, and the case was remanded for fresh adjudication after personal hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413146</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>