<?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>1993 (8) TMI 80 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43743</link>
    <description>A mere failure to furnish a detailed chemical analysis report did not amount to breach of natural justice where the party had received the essential test reports, was given notice, and had a fair opportunity to place its own evidence on classification. The challenge to the chemical reports and burden of proof concerned the merits of a predominantly factual fiscal classification dispute, which was appropriately examinable in the statutory appeal process. In view of the absence of procedural unfairness and the availability of an alternative remedy, writ intervention under Article 226 was unwarranted and the dispute was left to the statutory forum.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Aug 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Jun 2010 17:20:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=82272" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (8) TMI 80 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43743</link>
      <description>A mere failure to furnish a detailed chemical analysis report did not amount to breach of natural justice where the party had received the essential test reports, was given notice, and had a fair opportunity to place its own evidence on classification. The challenge to the chemical reports and burden of proof concerned the merits of a predominantly factual fiscal classification dispute, which was appropriately examinable in the statutory appeal process. In view of the absence of procedural unfairness and the availability of an alternative remedy, writ intervention under Article 226 was unwarranted and the dispute was left to the statutory forum.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Aug 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43743</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>