<?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 (5) TMI 506 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97874</link>
    <description>The Tribunal, comprising S/Shri Lajja Ram and P.S. Bajaj, dismissed the application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal before CEGAT, New Delhi. The delay of 347 days was attributed to misplaced appeal papers sent to their lawyers, leading to the closure of their unit and confusion among employees. Despite arguments by the advocate for the appellants, the Tribunal found the reasons provided insufficient to justify the lengthy delay. Emphasizing the need for case-specific analysis, the Tribunal ruled to dismiss the application, resulting in the dismissal of both the stay application and the appeal itself.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 14:27:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134931" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (5) TMI 506 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97874</link>
      <description>The Tribunal, comprising S/Shri Lajja Ram and P.S. Bajaj, dismissed the application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal before CEGAT, New Delhi. The delay of 347 days was attributed to misplaced appeal papers sent to their lawyers, leading to the closure of their unit and confusion among employees. Despite arguments by the advocate for the appellants, the Tribunal found the reasons provided insufficient to justify the lengthy delay. Emphasizing the need for case-specific analysis, the Tribunal ruled to dismiss the application, resulting in the dismissal of both the stay application and the appeal itself.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97874</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>