<?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>Delayed reply &amp; flimsy grounds for cross-exam led to dismissal of appeal against mis-declaration order.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83989</link>
    <description>The appellant sought stay of the impugned order citing violation of principles of natural justice due to denial of cross-examination of witnesses in quasi-judicial proceedings related to mis-declaration of quantity and value of goods. The Tribunal held that the appellant repeatedly delayed filing a reply to the show-cause notice and sought cross-examination on flimsy grounds without specifying valid reasons. Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the Tribunal ruled that cross-examination was unwarranted as the officers merely prepared documents based on evidence retrieved, and the appellant failed to contest the statements with specific reasons. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for lack of merit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 14 Dec 2024 07:58:28 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Dec 2024 07:58:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=782702" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Delayed reply &amp; flimsy grounds for cross-exam led to dismissal of appeal against mis-declaration order.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83989</link>
      <description>The appellant sought stay of the impugned order citing violation of principles of natural justice due to denial of cross-examination of witnesses in quasi-judicial proceedings related to mis-declaration of quantity and value of goods. The Tribunal held that the appellant repeatedly delayed filing a reply to the show-cause notice and sought cross-examination on flimsy grounds without specifying valid reasons. Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the Tribunal ruled that cross-examination was unwarranted as the officers merely prepared documents based on evidence retrieved, and the appellant failed to contest the statements with specific reasons. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for lack of merit.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 14 Dec 2024 07:58:28 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83989</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>