<?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>2000 (3) TMI 1113 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293771</link>
    <description>Revisional jurisdiction is supervisory in nature, and a revisional court disturbing concurrent findings of conviction and sentence must engage with the evidence and reasons recorded by the courts below. A cryptic order that sets aside such findings without discussion of the material on record amounts to an abdication of judicial function. The SC held the impugned revisional order unsustainable, set it aside, and directed the revision to be heard afresh in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2021 16:56:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=637798" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (3) TMI 1113 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293771</link>
      <description>Revisional jurisdiction is supervisory in nature, and a revisional court disturbing concurrent findings of conviction and sentence must engage with the evidence and reasons recorded by the courts below. A cryptic order that sets aside such findings without discussion of the material on record amounts to an abdication of judicial function. The SC held the impugned revisional order unsustainable, set it aside, and directed the revision to be heard afresh in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293771</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>