<?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 (11) TMI 488 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350609</link>
    <description>The case addressed the jurisdiction of Preventive Officers as &#039;proper officers&#039; for demand proceedings under the Customs Act, 1962. The Hon&#039;ble Delhi High Court ruled that DRI Officers were not competent to issue show cause notices for imports made before 08.04.2011. Various Tribunal benches set aside orders and remanded matters for jurisdictional determination. The Supreme Court clarified the issue. The Tribunal in another case highlighted the jurisdiction of DRI Officers, referencing legal provisions and amendments. Conflicting decisions of different High Courts were noted, leading to the matter being sub judice in the Supreme Court. The appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed for remand pending the apex court&#039;s decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2017 08:10:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=495263" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 488 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350609</link>
      <description>The case addressed the jurisdiction of Preventive Officers as &#039;proper officers&#039; for demand proceedings under the Customs Act, 1962. The Hon&#039;ble Delhi High Court ruled that DRI Officers were not competent to issue show cause notices for imports made before 08.04.2011. Various Tribunal benches set aside orders and remanded matters for jurisdictional determination. The Supreme Court clarified the issue. The Tribunal in another case highlighted the jurisdiction of DRI Officers, referencing legal provisions and amendments. Conflicting decisions of different High Courts were noted, leading to the matter being sub judice in the Supreme Court. The appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed for remand pending the apex court&#039;s decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350609</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>