<?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>Appellate authority&#039;s cryptic order set aside for violating natural justice principles and failing to address petitioners&#039; grounds</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89603</link>
    <description>HC set aside appellate authority&#039;s order for violating principles of natural justice by passing cryptic, non-speaking order without addressing petitioners&#039; grounds raised in appeal memos. Court held appellate authority failed to apply judicial mind, assign reasons, or deal with petitioners&#039; defense regarding right to cross-examine witnesses. Authority merely stated petitioners failed to provide credible evidence without examining their submissions. Applying Kranti Associates precedent, HC found impugned order cannot sustain judicial scrutiny due to non-application of mind. Both appellate orders set aside; petitioners directed to appear before appellate authority for fresh hearing on specified date.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2025 08:34:59 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2025 08:35:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=830433" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Appellate authority&#039;s cryptic order set aside for violating natural justice principles and failing to address petitioners&#039; grounds</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89603</link>
      <description>HC set aside appellate authority&#039;s order for violating principles of natural justice by passing cryptic, non-speaking order without addressing petitioners&#039; grounds raised in appeal memos. Court held appellate authority failed to apply judicial mind, assign reasons, or deal with petitioners&#039; defense regarding right to cross-examine witnesses. Authority merely stated petitioners failed to provide credible evidence without examining their submissions. Applying Kranti Associates precedent, HC found impugned order cannot sustain judicial scrutiny due to non-application of mind. Both appellate orders set aside; petitioners directed to appear before appellate authority for fresh hearing on specified date.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2025 08:34:59 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89603</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>