https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335489 Jurisdiction under Section 129C(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 depends on whether the appeal directly concerns rate of duty, assessable value, or the quantum of fine or penalty. A dispute over rejection of compounding applications as premature and not maintainable was held to fall outside that category, so a Single Member Bench could hear the appeals and connected applications. The interim order could not be recalled for inherent lack of jurisdiction because the bench was competent to deal with the matter; however, the restraint on coercive steps was treated as having served its limited purpose and was discontinued. en-us Fri, 21 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Apr 2017 15:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335489 Jurisdiction under Section 129C(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 depends on whether the appeal directly concerns rate of duty, assessable value, or the quantum of fine or penalty. A dispute over rejection of compounding applications as premature and not maintainable was held to fall outside that category, so a Single Member Bench could hear the appeals and connected applications. The interim order could not be recalled for inherent lack of jurisdiction because the bench was competent to deal with the matter; however, the restraint on coercive steps was treated as having served its limited purpose and was discontinued. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 21 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335489