Customs valuation and classification require comparable evidence and assessment of imported goods in their actual condition, invalidating related pena...
Terminal gate verification for transshipment containers shifts to operators, while Customs controls and discrepancy reporting requirements remain mand...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC allowed the petition, holding that the earlier dismissal of the Appellant's appeal was purely procedural for failure to make the mandatory 7.5% pre-deposit and not a merits adjudication; consequently the adjudicating Authority was not functus officio upon subsequent deposit. The impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals), CGST & Central Excise, Ranchi dated 17.01.2024 is set aside, the appeal is restored to its original number and remitted for adjudication on merits. The decision clarifies that procedural non-compliance resulting in non-entertainment does not extinguish the Appellant's substantive right to appellate adjudication once procedural requirements are satisfied.
The HC allowed the petition, holding that the earlier dismissal of the Appellant's appeal was purely procedural for failure to make the mandatory 7.5% pre-deposit and not a merits adjudication; consequently the adjudicating Authority was not functus officio upon subsequent deposit. The impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals), CGST & Central Excise, Ranchi dated 17.01.2024 is set aside, the appeal is restored to its original number and remitted for adjudication on merits. The decision clarifies that procedural non-compliance resulting in non-entertainment does not extinguish the Appellant's substantive right to appellate adjudication once procedural requirements are satisfied.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
