<?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>2008 (8) TMI 715 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124761</link>
    <description>Where a Tribunal&#039;s order setting aside confiscation and personal penalty remained unstayed, that order continued to operate and the consequential refund could not be withheld merely because the Revenue&#039;s challenge was pending. The lower appellate authority had no basis to remand the matter for fresh decision on the strength of a circular instead of giving effect to the subsisting appellate order. Once the adjudication order had been set aside, the confiscated amount was required to be refunded, and retention of the amount was unjustified. The remand order was therefore unsustainable and refund was directed to be sanctioned in accordance with the Tribunal&#039;s earlier order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2012 13:58:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=161704" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 715 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124761</link>
      <description>Where a Tribunal&#039;s order setting aside confiscation and personal penalty remained unstayed, that order continued to operate and the consequential refund could not be withheld merely because the Revenue&#039;s challenge was pending. The lower appellate authority had no basis to remand the matter for fresh decision on the strength of a circular instead of giving effect to the subsisting appellate order. Once the adjudication order had been set aside, the confiscated amount was required to be refunded, and retention of the amount was unjustified. The remand order was therefore unsustainable and refund was directed to be sanctioned in accordance with the Tribunal&#039;s earlier order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124761</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>