https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184442 The High Court held that separate, concurrently expressed, signed and dated judgments by each Member of a two Member Appellate Tribunal satisfy the requirement that an order be in writing and signed, and therefore constitute an order of the Tribunal under section 33(4) and rule 33(1). The Court treated the formal requirement for a single consolidated order as directory rather than mandatory where Members have collaborated, pooled their minds and reached the same conclusion, so absence of a single formal order is an irregularity of form and not a nullity, favouring the revenue. en-us Thu, 20 Sep 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Jul 2016 16:37:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184442 The High Court held that separate, concurrently expressed, signed and dated judgments by each Member of a two Member Appellate Tribunal satisfy the requirement that an order be in writing and signed, and therefore constitute an order of the Tribunal under section 33(4) and rule 33(1). The Court treated the formal requirement for a single consolidated order as directory rather than mandatory where Members have collaborated, pooled their minds and reached the same conclusion, so absence of a single formal order is an irregularity of form and not a nullity, favouring the revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 20 Sep 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184442