<?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>2007 (8) TMI 210 - HIGH COURT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3089</link>
    <description>A Tribunal exercising quasi-judicial power must record reasons for its conclusion, because an appellate court must be able to discern the basis of the decision. An order that contains no discussion explaining how the conclusion was reached cannot be effectively reviewed and is unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for reconsideration on its own merits with reasons.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Apr 2013 11:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42441" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (8) TMI 210 - HIGH COURT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3089</link>
      <description>A Tribunal exercising quasi-judicial power must record reasons for its conclusion, because an appellate court must be able to discern the basis of the decision. An order that contains no discussion explaining how the conclusion was reached cannot be effectively reviewed and is unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for reconsideration on its own merits with reasons.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3089</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>