<?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 (10) TMI 126 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84718</link>
    <description>The Tribunal&#039;s power to grant stay under section 35F is available only where an appeal has been instituted against the relevant decision or order. An application directed against an interim stay order of the Collector (Appeals), without any appeal against that order, was therefore misconceived and based on an incorrect understanding of law. In the absence of an appeal, the Tribunal could not entertain the stay request, and the application was rejected as not maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2011 11:43:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121785" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (10) TMI 126 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84718</link>
      <description>The Tribunal&#039;s power to grant stay under section 35F is available only where an appeal has been instituted against the relevant decision or order. An application directed against an interim stay order of the Collector (Appeals), without any appeal against that order, was therefore misconceived and based on an incorrect understanding of law. In the absence of an appeal, the Tribunal could not entertain the stay request, and the application was rejected as not maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84718</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>