https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767311 CESTAT Chennai held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain an appeal concerning drawback recovery. The Tribunal found that Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 explicitly excludes appeals related to payment of drawback under Chapter X from its purview. Citing Delhi HC precedent in Principal Commissioner of C.Ex. Delhi-I v. Space Telelink Ltd and Mumbai CEGAT decision in Premium Intertrade Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, the Tribunal concluded that matters involving drawback recovery fall outside its statutory jurisdiction. The appeal was dismissed as not maintainable due to want of jurisdiction. en-us Wed, 12 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Mar 2025 08:41:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767311 CESTAT Chennai held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain an appeal concerning drawback recovery. The Tribunal found that Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 explicitly excludes appeals related to payment of drawback under Chapter X from its purview. Citing Delhi HC precedent in Principal Commissioner of C.Ex. Delhi-I v. Space Telelink Ltd and Mumbai CEGAT decision in Premium Intertrade Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, the Tribunal concluded that matters involving drawback recovery fall outside its statutory jurisdiction. The appeal was dismissed as not maintainable due to want of jurisdiction. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 12 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767311