<?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>2026 (7) TMI 363 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794477</link>
    <description>Section 129A of the Customs Act does not provide a Tribunal appeal against an order of the Principal Chief Commissioner passed under the Courier Regulations, 2010 restoring courier registration while forfeiting security and imposing penalty. The Tribunal applied its earlier binding view that its appellate jurisdiction extends only to the specific decisions or orders named in the statute and not to regulatory orders unless the enactment expressly confers that remedy. It also declined to follow the contrary single-member view and held that the cited High Court decision did not displace the existing precedent. The appeal was therefore held not maintainable before the Tribunal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2026 14:15:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=910329" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 363 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794477</link>
      <description>Section 129A of the Customs Act does not provide a Tribunal appeal against an order of the Principal Chief Commissioner passed under the Courier Regulations, 2010 restoring courier registration while forfeiting security and imposing penalty. The Tribunal applied its earlier binding view that its appellate jurisdiction extends only to the specific decisions or orders named in the statute and not to regulatory orders unless the enactment expressly confers that remedy. It also declined to follow the contrary single-member view and held that the cited High Court decision did not displace the existing precedent. The appeal was therefore held not maintainable before the Tribunal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794477</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>