<?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>1967 (9) TMI 36 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45570</link>
    <description>Suspension orders under Rule 181(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 were held illegal because the Assistant Collector sought prior approval of the Collector without giving the licensee an opportunity to be heard on the proposed punishment. In a quasi-judicial matter, the authority deciding guilt and penalty must exercise independent judgment and cannot defer that function to a superior officer through an approval mechanism that deprives the affected party of representation. Departmental instructions lacking statutory force could not displace natural justice, and the same procedure also impaired the normal appellate remedy.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2010 15:36:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=84097" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (9) TMI 36 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45570</link>
      <description>Suspension orders under Rule 181(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 were held illegal because the Assistant Collector sought prior approval of the Collector without giving the licensee an opportunity to be heard on the proposed punishment. In a quasi-judicial matter, the authority deciding guilt and penalty must exercise independent judgment and cannot defer that function to a superior officer through an approval mechanism that deprives the affected party of representation. Departmental instructions lacking statutory force could not displace natural justice, and the same procedure also impaired the normal appellate remedy.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45570</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>