<?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>1988 (9) TMI 178 - CEGAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74018</link>
    <description>An adjudication order was found to be a non-speaking order because the operative decision was issued before the reasons were recorded. Reasons added later could not form part of the original adjudication, as a valid order must contain contemporaneous reasoning at the time the decision is made. The order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for de novo adjudication, with a direction to afford the appellant a personal hearing and re-adjudicate the dispute afresh.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 11:25:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=112297" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (9) TMI 178 - CEGAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74018</link>
      <description>An adjudication order was found to be a non-speaking order because the operative decision was issued before the reasons were recorded. Reasons added later could not form part of the original adjudication, as a valid order must contain contemporaneous reasoning at the time the decision is made. The order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for de novo adjudication, with a direction to afford the appellant a personal hearing and re-adjudicate the dispute afresh.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74018</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>