<?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>2004 (3) TMI 543 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111547</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside previous decisions due to jurisdictional errors. The Deputy Commissioner, lacking authority, wrongly rejected a remission application, and the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal without addressing this error. The Tribunal directed the remission application to be reconsidered by the correct authority, emphasizing the importance of following legal procedures and principles of natural justice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 10:13:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148563" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 543 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111547</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside previous decisions due to jurisdictional errors. The Deputy Commissioner, lacking authority, wrongly rejected a remission application, and the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal without addressing this error. The Tribunal directed the remission application to be reconsidered by the correct authority, emphasizing the importance of following legal procedures and principles of natural justice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111547</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>