<?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>2010 (2) TMI 1333 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464038</link>
    <description>A quasi-judicial order must disclose reasons showing how the facts were assessed and the legal principles applied; mere reproduction of submissions and precedent is insufficient. Where the Tribunal failed to explain its treatment of the allegations and the statutory charges, the decision did not amount to a speaking order and could not be properly reviewed. The order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh hearing and a reasoned decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2025 10:59:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=855215" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 1333 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464038</link>
      <description>A quasi-judicial order must disclose reasons showing how the facts were assessed and the legal principles applied; mere reproduction of submissions and precedent is insufficient. Where the Tribunal failed to explain its treatment of the allegations and the statutory charges, the decision did not amount to a speaking order and could not be properly reviewed. The order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh hearing and a reasoned decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464038</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>