<?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>2004 (6) TMI 466 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113049</link>
    <description>The Customs Act&#039;s finality clause for appellate tribunal orders does not itself confer any express or implied power on CESTAT to stay the operation of its own order. In the absence of a specific statutory enabling provision, such a power cannot be assumed. The tribunal therefore lacks authority to suspend its own final order merely because an application is made for that purpose, and the stay application is liable to be rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 15:17:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150065" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (6) TMI 466 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113049</link>
      <description>The Customs Act&#039;s finality clause for appellate tribunal orders does not itself confer any express or implied power on CESTAT to stay the operation of its own order. In the absence of a specific statutory enabling provision, such a power cannot be assumed. The tribunal therefore lacks authority to suspend its own final order merely because an application is made for that purpose, and the stay application is liable to be rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113049</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>