<?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>2022 (8) TMI 986 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426747</link>
    <description>An adjudication order in fiscal proceedings must be a reasoned and speaking order that considers the relevant material and shows application of mind to the issues raised. The Madras High Court found that the impugned order on duty liability for captive consumption of yarn did not adequately deal with the assessee&#039;s material, including departmental correspondence and the later finalisation of provisional assessment. Because the earlier Tribunal remand had required reconsideration of those matters, the deficient reasoning rendered the order unsustainable. The order was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Commissioner for fresh consideration from the stage of the show cause notices after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Aug 2022 10:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=688751" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (8) TMI 986 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426747</link>
      <description>An adjudication order in fiscal proceedings must be a reasoned and speaking order that considers the relevant material and shows application of mind to the issues raised. The Madras High Court found that the impugned order on duty liability for captive consumption of yarn did not adequately deal with the assessee&#039;s material, including departmental correspondence and the later finalisation of provisional assessment. Because the earlier Tribunal remand had required reconsideration of those matters, the deficient reasoning rendered the order unsustainable. The order was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Commissioner for fresh consideration from the stage of the show cause notices after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426747</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>