<?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>2003 (3) TMI 194 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51972</link>
    <description>Denial of a proper hearing can vitiate adjudication where notice of a subsequent hearing date is not served on the assessee&#039;s counsel. The inadequate opportunity was treated as a breach of natural justice, and the request to cross-examine the expert was relevant to a fair determination. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for de novo adjudication with a reasonable opportunity of hearing, including cross-examination of the expert.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Sep 2010 15:22:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90450" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (3) TMI 194 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51972</link>
      <description>Denial of a proper hearing can vitiate adjudication where notice of a subsequent hearing date is not served on the assessee&#039;s counsel. The inadequate opportunity was treated as a breach of natural justice, and the request to cross-examine the expert was relevant to a fair determination. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for de novo adjudication with a reasonable opportunity of hearing, including cross-examination of the expert.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51972</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>