<?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 (10) TMI 534 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100789</link>
    <description>Delay of fifty-four days in filing the appeal was not condoned because the explanation that the appeal papers were lost in counsel&#039;s chamber was found unsatisfactory. The applicant failed to show diligence in pursuing the filing within limitation or in taking timely preparatory steps before expiry of the prescribed period. As the reasons disclosed did not establish a sufficient basis for condonation, the application was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 11:00:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=137839" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (10) TMI 534 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100789</link>
      <description>Delay of fifty-four days in filing the appeal was not condoned because the explanation that the appeal papers were lost in counsel&#039;s chamber was found unsatisfactory. The applicant failed to show diligence in pursuing the filing within limitation or in taking timely preparatory steps before expiry of the prescribed period. As the reasons disclosed did not establish a sufficient basis for condonation, the application was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100789</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>