<?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>1999 (10) TMI 74 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45436</link>
    <description>A composite tribunal decision could not be sustained where three of the four separate judgments in a five-member bench were written after one member had already retired, leaving the decision improperly constituted. The Supreme Court held that the judgments and order under challenge could not stand on that footing and restored the matter to the tribunal for fresh hearing and disposal by a properly constituted bench.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Jul 2010 14:22:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=83965" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (10) TMI 74 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45436</link>
      <description>A composite tribunal decision could not be sustained where three of the four separate judgments in a five-member bench were written after one member had already retired, leaving the decision improperly constituted. The Supreme Court held that the judgments and order under challenge could not stand on that footing and restored the matter to the tribunal for fresh hearing and disposal by a properly constituted bench.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45436</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>