<?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>1985 (4) TMI 304 - CEGAT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167460</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain appeals against orders passed by an Additional Collector under the Gold (Control) Act because a prior Larger Bench had already held that such matters lie before the Collector (Appeals). To avoid conflicting decisions, subsequent similar appeals must be returned or transferred to the competent forum. The appeal was therefore sent to the Collector (Appeals) for disposal in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Dec 2014 15:03:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=371670" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (4) TMI 304 - CEGAT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167460</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain appeals against orders passed by an Additional Collector under the Gold (Control) Act because a prior Larger Bench had already held that such matters lie before the Collector (Appeals). To avoid conflicting decisions, subsequent similar appeals must be returned or transferred to the competent forum. The appeal was therefore sent to the Collector (Appeals) for disposal in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167460</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>