<?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>2001 (1) TMI 368 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95408</link>
    <description>Where remanded adjudication remained unreasonably delayed, the Tribunal used its procedural power to direct the customs authority to complete the pending adjudication within one month and then afford the affected party an opportunity to appeal. The direction was issued to ensure timely implementation of the earlier remand and to preserve the appellate remedy before the adjudicating authority. The miscellaneous application was therefore allowed by a mandatory time-bound procedural order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Dec 2011 12:16:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=132467" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (1) TMI 368 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95408</link>
      <description>Where remanded adjudication remained unreasonably delayed, the Tribunal used its procedural power to direct the customs authority to complete the pending adjudication within one month and then afford the affected party an opportunity to appeal. The direction was issued to ensure timely implementation of the earlier remand and to preserve the appellate remedy before the adjudicating authority. The miscellaneous application was therefore allowed by a mandatory time-bound procedural order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95408</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>