<?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>1978 (12) TMI 49 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40685</link>
    <description>The existence of a statutory appeal does not bar the High Court from issuing certiorari where the customs authority acts without jurisdiction, in excess of jurisdiction, or in breach of natural justice. In this customs matter, the proceedings were invalid because the confiscation and penalty were based on material that was not properly disclosed, the relevant statement was not adequately supplied, and no fair opportunity was given to test the adverse evidence or explain the transport records and package markings. The High Court could therefore entertain the writ petition, and the setting aside of the confiscation and penalty was sustained, with liberty to hold a fresh enquiry according to law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Dec 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2014 14:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=79216" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (12) TMI 49 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40685</link>
      <description>The existence of a statutory appeal does not bar the High Court from issuing certiorari where the customs authority acts without jurisdiction, in excess of jurisdiction, or in breach of natural justice. In this customs matter, the proceedings were invalid because the confiscation and penalty were based on material that was not properly disclosed, the relevant statement was not adequately supplied, and no fair opportunity was given to test the adverse evidence or explain the transport records and package markings. The High Court could therefore entertain the writ petition, and the setting aside of the confiscation and penalty was sustained, with liberty to hold a fresh enquiry according to law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Dec 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40685</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>