<?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>1988 (5) TMI 228 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73980</link>
    <description>Section 40 of the Finance Act, 1984 excluded the Appellate Tribunal&#039;s jurisdiction over orders under clause (b) of Section 129A of the Customs Act where the goods were imported or exported as baggage. Because the goods were admitted to be baggage, the statutory bar applied and the appeal was not maintainable before the Tribunal. A request to transfer the matter to the revisional authority was also rejected, as the Customs Act did not provide for such transfer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 May 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Jun 2011 18:02:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=112259" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (5) TMI 228 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73980</link>
      <description>Section 40 of the Finance Act, 1984 excluded the Appellate Tribunal&#039;s jurisdiction over orders under clause (b) of Section 129A of the Customs Act where the goods were imported or exported as baggage. Because the goods were admitted to be baggage, the statutory bar applied and the appeal was not maintainable before the Tribunal. A request to transfer the matter to the revisional authority was also rejected, as the Customs Act did not provide for such transfer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 May 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73980</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>