<?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>2012 (9) TMI 570 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216762</link>
    <description>The court set aside the impugned order in revision petitions under the Customs Act, finding insufficient reasoning and discussion by the Joint Secretary. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication, directing the petitioners to appear before the Joint Secretary for a new hearing. The decision did not determine the merits of the contentions. The case highlighted the necessity of detailed reasoning in quasi-judicial orders, specifically addressing the admissibility of statements under Section 108 against third parties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Sep 2012 13:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=190141" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (9) TMI 570 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216762</link>
      <description>The court set aside the impugned order in revision petitions under the Customs Act, finding insufficient reasoning and discussion by the Joint Secretary. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication, directing the petitioners to appear before the Joint Secretary for a new hearing. The decision did not determine the merits of the contentions. The case highlighted the necessity of detailed reasoning in quasi-judicial orders, specifically addressing the admissibility of statements under Section 108 against third parties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216762</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>