<?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 (3) TMI 371 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95983</link>
    <description>Settlement under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme obtained by the principal noticee was treated as extending to the co-noticees where their connected appeals were still pending. The Tribunal applied the principle that a matter remains pending adjudication while an appeal is on foot, so the benefit of settlement was not confined to the principal noticee alone. On that basis, the proceedings against the directors abated and their appeals were dismissed as infructuous.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:39:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133042" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (3) TMI 371 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95983</link>
      <description>Settlement under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme obtained by the principal noticee was treated as extending to the co-noticees where their connected appeals were still pending. The Tribunal applied the principle that a matter remains pending adjudication while an appeal is on foot, so the benefit of settlement was not confined to the principal noticee alone. On that basis, the proceedings against the directors abated and their appeals were dismissed as infructuous.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95983</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>