<?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 (12) TMI 290 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106922</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Mumbai, allowed the appeals challenging the jurisdiction of the Assistant Director DRI in issuing the show cause notice and the authority of officers of the Commissionerate of Customs at Mumbai to initiate action. The Tribunal held that the lack of jurisdiction and incorrect initiation of action rendered the proceedings legally flawed, leading to setting aside of the impugned order without delving into the case&#039;s merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2012 13:05:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=143942" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (12) TMI 290 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106922</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Mumbai, allowed the appeals challenging the jurisdiction of the Assistant Director DRI in issuing the show cause notice and the authority of officers of the Commissionerate of Customs at Mumbai to initiate action. The Tribunal held that the lack of jurisdiction and incorrect initiation of action rendered the proceedings legally flawed, leading to setting aside of the impugned order without delving into the case&#039;s merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106922</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>