<?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 (9) TMI 71 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44297</link>
    <description>A statutory transfer of pending excise adjudication from one Collectorate to a centralised authority was upheld as an administrative arrangement made for uniformity and expedition. The court treated the reassignment as not affecting the assessee&#039;s liability, because no merits determination or final civil consequence arose from the transfer itself. As the assessee had no vested right to be adjudicated only by a particular Collectorate, the audi alteram partem rule was not attracted at that stage. Prior notice was therefore not required before transferring the cases, and the challenge to the transfer failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 13:00:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=82826" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (9) TMI 71 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44297</link>
      <description>A statutory transfer of pending excise adjudication from one Collectorate to a centralised authority was upheld as an administrative arrangement made for uniformity and expedition. The court treated the reassignment as not affecting the assessee&#039;s liability, because no merits determination or final civil consequence arose from the transfer itself. As the assessee had no vested right to be adjudicated only by a particular Collectorate, the audi alteram partem rule was not attracted at that stage. Prior notice was therefore not required before transferring the cases, and the challenge to the transfer failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44297</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>