<?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>2024 (5) TMI 20 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751967</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appellant&#039;s case, confirming the Commissioner (Appeals) lacked jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against the Administrative Commissioner of Customs&#039; decision. The appellant&#039;s request to amend Shipping Bills under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, was rejected due to non-compliance with the CBIC circular&#039;s time limit, and the appeal was deemed non-maintainable under Section 128.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 May 2024 07:58:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=751528" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (5) TMI 20 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751967</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appellant&#039;s case, confirming the Commissioner (Appeals) lacked jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against the Administrative Commissioner of Customs&#039; decision. The appellant&#039;s request to amend Shipping Bills under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, was rejected due to non-compliance with the CBIC circular&#039;s time limit, and the appeal was deemed non-maintainable under Section 128.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751967</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>