<?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 548 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109774</link>
    <description>An adjudication order was found unsustainable because the officer who issued it lacked jurisdiction to decide the show cause notice. The absence of any specific transfer of jurisdiction by the Central Government meant the matter could not validly be adjudicated by that authority. The impugned order was therefore set aside, and the case was remanded to the Commissioner of Customs having jurisdiction to adjudicate the notice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:44:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146791" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (12) TMI 548 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109774</link>
      <description>An adjudication order was found unsustainable because the officer who issued it lacked jurisdiction to decide the show cause notice. The absence of any specific transfer of jurisdiction by the Central Government meant the matter could not validly be adjudicated by that authority. The impugned order was therefore set aside, and the case was remanded to the Commissioner of Customs having jurisdiction to adjudicate the notice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109774</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>