<?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>2016 (7) TMI 1434 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200742</link>
    <description>Recovery of drawback was treated as falling within disputes relating to payment of drawback under Chapter X of the Customs Act, 1962, so the statutory bar on appeal under Section 129A applied to orders passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). The Tribunal therefore held that such matters were not maintainable before it and that the proper course was to pursue the revision remedy before the Revision Authority. The appeal was dismissed as not maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2018 10:35:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=517449" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 1434 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200742</link>
      <description>Recovery of drawback was treated as falling within disputes relating to payment of drawback under Chapter X of the Customs Act, 1962, so the statutory bar on appeal under Section 129A applied to orders passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). The Tribunal therefore held that such matters were not maintainable before it and that the proper course was to pursue the revision remedy before the Revision Authority. The appeal was dismissed as not maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200742</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>