<?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 (4) TMI 491 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97815</link>
    <description>Delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was condoned where the appellant had pursued the matter before the Tribunal under a bona fide mistaken impression about the proper appellate forum, created by the form in which the impugned communication was issued by the Assistant Commissioner. The Commissioner (Appeals) order was set aside and the appeal was remanded for disposal on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 11:53:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134872" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (4) TMI 491 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97815</link>
      <description>Delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was condoned where the appellant had pursued the matter before the Tribunal under a bona fide mistaken impression about the proper appellate forum, created by the form in which the impugned communication was issued by the Assistant Commissioner. The Commissioner (Appeals) order was set aside and the appeal was remanded for disposal on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97815</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>