<?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 (10) TMI 808 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238353</link>
    <description>A tribunal without statutory review power becomes functus officio once it has decided the matter, so it cannot recall a concluded order under the guise of reopening proceedings. Entertaining a recall application in such circumstances would amount to an impermissible review of the earlier dismissal. The application was also unsupported by any legal basis, as the applicant had not appeared to explain the case. The recall application was therefore held not maintainable and rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Oct 2013 12:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=332941" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (10) TMI 808 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238353</link>
      <description>A tribunal without statutory review power becomes functus officio once it has decided the matter, so it cannot recall a concluded order under the guise of reopening proceedings. Entertaining a recall application in such circumstances would amount to an impermissible review of the earlier dismissal. The application was also unsupported by any legal basis, as the applicant had not appeared to explain the case. The recall application was therefore held not maintainable and rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238353</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>