<?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>1995 (6) TMI 21 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44101</link>
    <description>A revisional order in excise proceedings was set aside because the petitioners were not given a personal hearing before disposal of the revision application. The Court held that, where the grievance specifically concerns denial of hearing, natural justice requires an opportunity of oral hearing in revision. The matter was remanded for reconsideration on merits after affording the petitioners a hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jun 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 10:24:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=82630" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (6) TMI 21 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44101</link>
      <description>A revisional order in excise proceedings was set aside because the petitioners were not given a personal hearing before disposal of the revision application. The Court held that, where the grievance specifically concerns denial of hearing, natural justice requires an opportunity of oral hearing in revision. The matter was remanded for reconsideration on merits after affording the petitioners a hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jun 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44101</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>