https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411321 Non-implementation of a prior tribunal direction under Rule 41 to amend shipping bills did not justify treating a defective High Court appeal as a stay, because mere filing of an appeal without any stay does not suspend compliance with the order. The Tribunal noted that the Department had not shown effective pursuit of its challenge at the High Court stage, but it nevertheless granted one final opportunity instead of issuing immediate coercive directions. Further time was allowed for the Department either to implement the earlier order or to pursue the writ petition before the High Court. en-us Mon, 02 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Aug 2021 08:40:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411321 Non-implementation of a prior tribunal direction under Rule 41 to amend shipping bills did not justify treating a defective High Court appeal as a stay, because mere filing of an appeal without any stay does not suspend compliance with the order. The Tribunal noted that the Department had not shown effective pursuit of its challenge at the High Court stage, but it nevertheless granted one final opportunity instead of issuing immediate coercive directions. Further time was allowed for the Department either to implement the earlier order or to pursue the writ petition before the High Court. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 02 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411321