<?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>2001 (2) TMI 396 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95515</link>
    <description>Non-appearance on the hearing date was accepted as a bona fide mistake in noting the date, and the absence was found not to be intentional, deliberate, or due to want of prosecution. On that basis, the earlier dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution was recalled, and the appeal was restored to its original number.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 11:08:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=132574" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (2) TMI 396 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95515</link>
      <description>Non-appearance on the hearing date was accepted as a bona fide mistake in noting the date, and the absence was found not to be intentional, deliberate, or due to want of prosecution. On that basis, the earlier dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution was recalled, and the appeal was restored to its original number.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95515</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>