<?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>2000 (3) TMI 234 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93292</link>
    <description>Dismissal of an appeal for failure to comply with a pre-deposit direction cannot stand where the appellants had sought modification and no effective opportunity of hearing was given before the appellate order was passed. The proper course was to hear the matter on merits in accordance with law. The dismissal order was therefore set aside and the appeal was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh adjudication on merits without insisting on pre-deposit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 25 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2011 16:57:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=130353" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (3) TMI 234 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93292</link>
      <description>Dismissal of an appeal for failure to comply with a pre-deposit direction cannot stand where the appellants had sought modification and no effective opportunity of hearing was given before the appellate order was passed. The proper course was to hear the matter on merits in accordance with law. The dismissal order was therefore set aside and the appeal was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh adjudication on merits without insisting on pre-deposit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 25 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93292</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>