<?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 (8) TMI 854 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100629</link>
    <description>The impugned order could not continue to operate against the appellant because it had already been set aside in the co-noticee&#039;s appeal. On that basis, no separate issue survived for adjudication in the present appeal, as the earlier final order had removed the foundation of the dispute. The appeal was accordingly allowed as there was no remaining matter requiring decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 16:02:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=137680" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (8) TMI 854 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100629</link>
      <description>The impugned order could not continue to operate against the appellant because it had already been set aside in the co-noticee&#039;s appeal. On that basis, no separate issue survived for adjudication in the present appeal, as the earlier final order had removed the foundation of the dispute. The appeal was accordingly allowed as there was no remaining matter requiring decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100629</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>