<?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>1998 (8) TMI 206 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89343</link>
    <description>A delay of 141 days in filing a revenue appeal was not condoned because the explanation of misplaced and later retrieved case papers did not cover the period after retrieval up to filing. No affidavit or time chart was produced, and mere misplacement of files was treated as insufficient cause. The condonation application was therefore rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:41:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126405" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (8) TMI 206 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89343</link>
      <description>A delay of 141 days in filing a revenue appeal was not condoned because the explanation of misplaced and later retrieved case papers did not cover the period after retrieval up to filing. No affidavit or time chart was produced, and mere misplacement of files was treated as insufficient cause. The condonation application was therefore rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89343</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>