<?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>1992 (11) TMI 193 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82271</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the condonation of delay application and rejected the appeals as time-barred under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The decision was upheld as the appeals did not meet the criteria for High Court reference under Section 35G, focusing on the eligibility and classification of C.C. pipes. The Tribunal&#039;s ruling was supported by legal principles and precedents, emphasizing adherence to statutory requirements for higher court intervention.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jul 2011 10:46:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=119416" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (11) TMI 193 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82271</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the condonation of delay application and rejected the appeals as time-barred under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The decision was upheld as the appeals did not meet the criteria for High Court reference under Section 35G, focusing on the eligibility and classification of C.C. pipes. The Tribunal&#039;s ruling was supported by legal principles and precedents, emphasizing adherence to statutory requirements for higher court intervention.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82271</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>