<?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>1986 (9) TMI 85 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41841</link>
    <description>The Tribunal, being a statutory creature, could act only within powers conferred by the Act and rules. Where it found that the appeal lay under the proviso to Section 35-B before the Central Government under Section 35-EE, the proper course was to return the papers for fresh presentation before the competent forum; Rule 41 of the Tribunal Procedure Rules could not expand jurisdiction or override the limitation framework in Section 35-EE(2). Treating the matter as transferred would also prejudice the appellant by affecting its limitation plea. The direction for transfer was therefore without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Jun 2010 13:47:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80370" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (9) TMI 85 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41841</link>
      <description>The Tribunal, being a statutory creature, could act only within powers conferred by the Act and rules. Where it found that the appeal lay under the proviso to Section 35-B before the Central Government under Section 35-EE, the proper course was to return the papers for fresh presentation before the competent forum; Rule 41 of the Tribunal Procedure Rules could not expand jurisdiction or override the limitation framework in Section 35-EE(2). Treating the matter as transferred would also prejudice the appellant by affecting its limitation plea. The direction for transfer was therefore without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41841</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>