TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an appeal filed on behalf of a company was competent when it was not signed and verified by the principal officer of the company as required by the Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982.
Analysis: The rules governing appeals by a company required the appeal to be signed and verified by the principal officer. The person who appeared for the appellant was neither an employee nor a special power of attorney holder and was authorised only to make submissions. The appeal was therefore not signed and verified by a person competent in law.
Conclusion: The appeal was incompetent and could not be taken on record.
TaxTMI 
