<?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>2006 (5) TMI 284 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118252</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Chennai, allowed the appellant to raise a new plea challenging the jurisdiction of the authority passing the Order-in-Original, citing a Supreme Court ruling. The Tribunal permitted the addition of this new ground to the memorandum of appeal, emphasizing the right of parties to raise legal issues even at later stages. The decision underscores the significance of jurisdictional matters in administrative decisions and the importance of considering all relevant legal arguments, supported by precedent. The hearing was adjourned to implement the order within two weeks, with the decision made by Tribunal members P.G. Chacko and P. Karthikeyan.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Jun 2012 15:02:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155249" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (5) TMI 284 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118252</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Chennai, allowed the appellant to raise a new plea challenging the jurisdiction of the authority passing the Order-in-Original, citing a Supreme Court ruling. The Tribunal permitted the addition of this new ground to the memorandum of appeal, emphasizing the right of parties to raise legal issues even at later stages. The decision underscores the significance of jurisdictional matters in administrative decisions and the importance of considering all relevant legal arguments, supported by precedent. The hearing was adjourned to implement the order within two weeks, with the decision made by Tribunal members P.G. Chacko and P. Karthikeyan.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118252</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>