https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107690 The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the party, setting aside the order of attachment for goods. It held that the attachment order was unsustainable as the original order had not been served on the party, making the appeal against the attachment order maintainable. The Tribunal disagreed with the Commissioner's view that the attachment order was not appealable, emphasizing that the Assistant Commissioner's decision should have been subject to appeal due to its quasi-judicial nature. Consequently, the Tribunal found in favor of the party, concluding that the attachment order was not sustainable without proper service of the original order. en-us Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Mar 2012 13:36:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107690 The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the party, setting aside the order of attachment for goods. It held that the attachment order was unsustainable as the original order had not been served on the party, making the appeal against the attachment order maintainable. The Tribunal disagreed with the Commissioner's view that the attachment order was not appealable, emphasizing that the Assistant Commissioner's decision should have been subject to appeal due to its quasi-judicial nature. Consequently, the Tribunal found in favor of the party, concluding that the attachment order was not sustainable without proper service of the original order. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107690