<?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>1999 (9) TMI 241 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92419</link>
    <description>The forum for an appeal is determined by the law in force on the date of filing. On the prevailing rule position in February 1993, an appeal against an order of an Additional Collector of Central Excise lay to the Collector (Appeals) under section 35 of the Central Excise Act, and the jurisdiction objection was rejected because the amended position had already taken effect. The appeal was therefore correctly entertained by the Collector (Appeals), and the revenue challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Nov 2011 15:25:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129480" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (9) TMI 241 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92419</link>
      <description>The forum for an appeal is determined by the law in force on the date of filing. On the prevailing rule position in February 1993, an appeal against an order of an Additional Collector of Central Excise lay to the Collector (Appeals) under section 35 of the Central Excise Act, and the jurisdiction objection was rejected because the amended position had already taken effect. The appeal was therefore correctly entertained by the Collector (Appeals), and the revenue challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92419</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>