<?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>1997 (7) TMI 151 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44678</link>
    <description>The Tribunal should not decide a customs appeal on evidence produced for the first time before it when the parties had not led that evidence before the adjudicating authority. If additional evidence was necessary, the proper course was to remit the matter to the Commissioner of Customs for fresh adjudication after giving both sides an opportunity to be heard. The Tribunal&#039;s reliance on first-instance evidence at the appellate stage was procedurally improper, and its order was set aside with remand for fresh decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Jul 2010 11:36:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=83207" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (7) TMI 151 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44678</link>
      <description>The Tribunal should not decide a customs appeal on evidence produced for the first time before it when the parties had not led that evidence before the adjudicating authority. If additional evidence was necessary, the proper course was to remit the matter to the Commissioner of Customs for fresh adjudication after giving both sides an opportunity to be heard. The Tribunal&#039;s reliance on first-instance evidence at the appellate stage was procedurally improper, and its order was set aside with remand for fresh decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44678</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>