https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105708 An appeal challenging a less charge demand was held not maintainable because the demand had been issued to and confirmed against the importer alone. The importer, as the person aggrieved by the appellate order, had standing to invoke the Tribunal's jurisdiction, whereas the contractors were not the persons against whom the demand stood confirmed and therefore lacked locus to file the appeal. The appeal was dismissed for want of maintainability. en-us Tue, 27 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 12:21:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105708 An appeal challenging a less charge demand was held not maintainable because the demand had been issued to and confirmed against the importer alone. The importer, as the person aggrieved by the appellate order, had standing to invoke the Tribunal's jurisdiction, whereas the contractors were not the persons against whom the demand stood confirmed and therefore lacked locus to file the appeal. The appeal was dismissed for want of maintainability. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 27 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105708