<?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>1997 (1) TMI 181 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86326</link>
    <description>Departmental appeal under the Customs Act was not maintainable because valid authorisation requires the Collector to apply his mind, form an opinion that the impugned order is not legal or proper, and then direct the proper officer to appeal on his behalf. A mere file notation of &quot;Appeal&quot; did not satisfy that statutory requirement, so the authorisation was invalid and the appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2011 11:00:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123393" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (1) TMI 181 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86326</link>
      <description>Departmental appeal under the Customs Act was not maintainable because valid authorisation requires the Collector to apply his mind, form an opinion that the impugned order is not legal or proper, and then direct the proper officer to appeal on his behalf. A mere file notation of &quot;Appeal&quot; did not satisfy that statutory requirement, so the authorisation was invalid and the appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86326</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>