<?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>1995 (1) TMI 222 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84244</link>
    <description>The Tribunal rejected three appeals (C/666/91, C/667/91, and C/668/91) due to the appellants&#039; lack of diligence in filing them promptly after becoming aware of the correct forum. The delay in filing the appeals, attributed to a misunderstanding by the clearing agent, was deemed inexcusable by the judge. Emphasizing the importance of diligence in legal proceedings, the Tribunal held that the delay could not be condoned, resulting in the rejection of the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:30:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121388" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (1) TMI 222 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84244</link>
      <description>The Tribunal rejected three appeals (C/666/91, C/667/91, and C/668/91) due to the appellants&#039; lack of diligence in filing them promptly after becoming aware of the correct forum. The delay in filing the appeals, attributed to a misunderstanding by the clearing agent, was deemed inexcusable by the judge. Emphasizing the importance of diligence in legal proceedings, the Tribunal held that the delay could not be condoned, resulting in the rejection of the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84244</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>