<?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>1965 (9) TMI 13 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40419</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court allowed an appeal by Messrs Aluminium Corporation of India Ltd. against the Government of India, Ministry of Finance&#039;s order regarding excess excise duty on slabs and billets. The Court found procedural irregularities and a violation of natural justice principles in the decision-making process. As a result, the Court set aside the Government&#039;s order, remanding the case for a fresh decision with instructions to provide the Company a fair opportunity to present its case adequately. The respondents were directed to bear the appellant Company&#039;s costs, emphasizing the importance of procedural fairness and adherence to natural justice principles in quasi-judicial proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2014 19:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=78950" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1965 (9) TMI 13 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40419</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court allowed an appeal by Messrs Aluminium Corporation of India Ltd. against the Government of India, Ministry of Finance&#039;s order regarding excess excise duty on slabs and billets. The Court found procedural irregularities and a violation of natural justice principles in the decision-making process. As a result, the Court set aside the Government&#039;s order, remanding the case for a fresh decision with instructions to provide the Company a fair opportunity to present its case adequately. The respondents were directed to bear the appellant Company&#039;s costs, emphasizing the importance of procedural fairness and adherence to natural justice principles in quasi-judicial proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Sep 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40419</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>