<?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>1990 (6) TMI 79 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42857</link>
    <description>Relevant documents produced belatedly should not defeat substantive adjudication where there is no lack of bona fides. The High Court applied the principle governing admission of additional evidence and held that the appellate authority ought to have extended time for receipt of the documents and directed reconsideration by the original authority after taking them into account. It treated admission of the documents as consistent with natural justice and the ends of justice, since the dispute turned only on the timing of production and a sufficient explanation existed. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration on merits after hearing both sides.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:57:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=81386" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (6) TMI 79 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42857</link>
      <description>Relevant documents produced belatedly should not defeat substantive adjudication where there is no lack of bona fides. The High Court applied the principle governing admission of additional evidence and held that the appellate authority ought to have extended time for receipt of the documents and directed reconsideration by the original authority after taking them into account. It treated admission of the documents as consistent with natural justice and the ends of justice, since the dispute turned only on the timing of production and a sufficient explanation existed. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration on merits after hearing both sides.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42857</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>