<?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>2010 (3) TMI 200 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76560</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed through remand, emphasizing the importance of considering all relevant factors, including holidays, in determining the timeliness of filing appeals. The judgment set aside the impugned order, remanding the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision on the limitation issue after affording the appellant a proper hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=114767" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (3) TMI 200 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76560</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed through remand, emphasizing the importance of considering all relevant factors, including holidays, in determining the timeliness of filing appeals. The judgment set aside the impugned order, remanding the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision on the limitation issue after affording the appellant a proper hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76560</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>