<?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>2013 (2) TMI 146 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220736</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner under Regulation 21 of the CHALR 2004 was not maintainable based on Regulation 22(8). The decision clarified the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, emphasizing the need to adhere to the specific provisions governing appeals in similar cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Jan 2014 16:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=194098" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (2) TMI 146 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220736</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner under Regulation 21 of the CHALR 2004 was not maintainable based on Regulation 22(8). The decision clarified the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, emphasizing the need to adhere to the specific provisions governing appeals in similar cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220736</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>