<?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 (7) TMI 263 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86908</link>
    <description>The Assistant Collector lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate a dispute where the duty involved exceeded the monetary limit fixed by the Board&#039;s circular. An adjudication made beyond the authority&#039;s delegated pecuniary jurisdiction is void ab initio, and any subsequent proceedings based on that void order cannot stand. The matter therefore had to be placed before the competent authority within the proper adjudicatory limit, and the order was treated as a nullity.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2011 13:04:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123975" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (7) TMI 263 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86908</link>
      <description>The Assistant Collector lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate a dispute where the duty involved exceeded the monetary limit fixed by the Board&#039;s circular. An adjudication made beyond the authority&#039;s delegated pecuniary jurisdiction is void ab initio, and any subsequent proceedings based on that void order cannot stand. The matter therefore had to be placed before the competent authority within the proper adjudicatory limit, and the order was treated as a nullity.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86908</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>