<?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>1987 (2) TMI 395 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80209</link>
    <description>A departmental appeal was held not maintainable because the order was received when only a right to seek review existed, not a right to appeal. The period for seeking review had already expired before the Tribunal was constituted, so no subsisting appellate right remained that could be preserved by condonation of delay. The Tribunal therefore could not treat the matter as a delayed appeal within its condonation power, and the appeals were rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2011 14:42:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117355" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (2) TMI 395 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80209</link>
      <description>A departmental appeal was held not maintainable because the order was received when only a right to seek review existed, not a right to appeal. The period for seeking review had already expired before the Tribunal was constituted, so no subsisting appellate right remained that could be preserved by condonation of delay. The Tribunal therefore could not treat the matter as a delayed appeal within its condonation power, and the appeals were rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80209</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>