<?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>2017 (6) TMI 95 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343824</link>
    <description>The High Court ruled that the order passed by a single member of CESTAT in an appeal under Section 129C of the Customs Act, 1962, was without jurisdiction due to the value of the confiscated goods exceeding the limit for a single member&#039;s authority. The Court set aside the order and remanded the matter to CESTAT for a fresh decision within three months, emphasizing compliance with the statutory requirements of constituting Benches as per Section 129C.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2018 16:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=470721" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (6) TMI 95 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343824</link>
      <description>The High Court ruled that the order passed by a single member of CESTAT in an appeal under Section 129C of the Customs Act, 1962, was without jurisdiction due to the value of the confiscated goods exceeding the limit for a single member&#039;s authority. The Court set aside the order and remanded the matter to CESTAT for a fresh decision within three months, emphasizing compliance with the statutory requirements of constituting Benches as per Section 129C.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343824</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>