<?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>2002 (4) TMI 404 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102050</link>
    <description>The adjudication was invalid because the show cause notice was made answerable to the Commissioner of Customs, New Custom House, Mumbai, yet it was decided by the Commissioner, Airport, Mumbai without any specific transfer of jurisdiction. On that jurisdictional objection, and in light of the cited precedent, the adjudication was held unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner having jurisdiction to adjudicate the notice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 15:39:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139099" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (4) TMI 404 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102050</link>
      <description>The adjudication was invalid because the show cause notice was made answerable to the Commissioner of Customs, New Custom House, Mumbai, yet it was decided by the Commissioner, Airport, Mumbai without any specific transfer of jurisdiction. On that jurisdictional objection, and in light of the cited precedent, the adjudication was held unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner having jurisdiction to adjudicate the notice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102050</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>