<?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 (11) TMI 376 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95059</link>
    <description>The court granted the appellant&#039;s Miscellaneous Application seeking condonation of delay in filing an appeal by about 132 days. The delay was attributed to the illness and subsequent resignation of the Dealing Assistant of the appellant company. Despite the Revenue&#039;s opposition citing lack of adequate explanation for the delay, the Judge accepted the appellant&#039;s explanations and recognized the strong case on merits, particularly regarding the denial of Modvat credit due to procedural lapses. Granting condonation was deemed necessary to prevent a denial of justice, leading to the favorable outcome for the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2011 16:15:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=132118" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (11) TMI 376 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95059</link>
      <description>The court granted the appellant&#039;s Miscellaneous Application seeking condonation of delay in filing an appeal by about 132 days. The delay was attributed to the illness and subsequent resignation of the Dealing Assistant of the appellant company. Despite the Revenue&#039;s opposition citing lack of adequate explanation for the delay, the Judge accepted the appellant&#039;s explanations and recognized the strong case on merits, particularly regarding the denial of Modvat credit due to procedural lapses. Granting condonation was deemed necessary to prevent a denial of justice, leading to the favorable outcome for the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95059</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>