<?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>1996 (6) TMI 244 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85900</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as not maintainable, emphasizing that the appellants had not exercised their right to appeal before the Collector (Appeals) and thus could not directly approach the Tribunal. The Tribunal also concluded that no substantial question of law arose for reference to the High Court, as the issue was one of fact rather than law. The reference applications were therefore rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Aug 2011 17:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122967" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (6) TMI 244 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85900</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeals as not maintainable, emphasizing that the appellants had not exercised their right to appeal before the Collector (Appeals) and thus could not directly approach the Tribunal. The Tribunal also concluded that no substantial question of law arose for reference to the High Court, as the issue was one of fact rather than law. The reference applications were therefore rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85900</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>