https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311675 Quasi-judicial orders must contain at least brief reasons to support the conclusions reached and to permit judicial scrutiny; bare conclusions without reasoning cannot be sustained. The Supreme Court did not examine the merits of the dispute or the preliminary objections, and confined itself to the absence of reasons in the impugned orders. The orders were set aside for want of reasons and the matters were remanded to the Appellate Tribunal for fresh consideration on merits, including the preliminary objections. en-us Mon, 06 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jan 2024 11:51:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311675 Quasi-judicial orders must contain at least brief reasons to support the conclusions reached and to permit judicial scrutiny; bare conclusions without reasoning cannot be sustained. The Supreme Court did not examine the merits of the dispute or the preliminary objections, and confined itself to the absence of reasons in the impugned orders. The orders were set aside for want of reasons and the matters were remanded to the Appellate Tribunal for fresh consideration on merits, including the preliminary objections. Case-Laws Law of Competition Mon, 06 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311675