<?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>1993 (7) TMI 201 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83173</link>
    <description>The Tribunal rejected the application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal, citing that while the initial delay in pursuing the wrong remedy was condonable, the subsequent delay in preparing the appeal documents lacked sufficient cause. Emphasizing the statutory right to appeal, the Tribunal held that the delay did not meet the criteria for sufficient cause, leading to the dismissal of the stay application and the appeal as time-barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2011 15:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120318" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (7) TMI 201 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83173</link>
      <description>The Tribunal rejected the application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal, citing that while the initial delay in pursuing the wrong remedy was condonable, the subsequent delay in preparing the appeal documents lacked sufficient cause. Emphasizing the statutory right to appeal, the Tribunal held that the delay did not meet the criteria for sufficient cause, leading to the dismissal of the stay application and the appeal as time-barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83173</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>