https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80234 An oral pronouncement in open court allowing an appeal with the note "order to follow" was not treated as a valid order under Section 35-C of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The Tribunal reasoned that a Section 35-C order must be the formal expression of the decision and, for a quasi-judicial appellate body, should ordinarily be a speaking and reasoned order. The statutory scheme and Tribunal Rules requiring written, signed and dated orders showed that the operative appellate order must disclose intelligible grounds and reasons. The preliminary objection was therefore rejected. en-us Mon, 31 Jul 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Jun 2011 16:01:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80234 An oral pronouncement in open court allowing an appeal with the note "order to follow" was not treated as a valid order under Section 35-C of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The Tribunal reasoned that a Section 35-C order must be the formal expression of the decision and, for a quasi-judicial appellate body, should ordinarily be a speaking and reasoned order. The statutory scheme and Tribunal Rules requiring written, signed and dated orders showed that the operative appellate order must disclose intelligible grounds and reasons. The preliminary objection was therefore rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 31 Jul 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80234