<?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 643 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112971</link>
    <description>An application to restore an appeal dismissed for non-compliance and non-appearance was rejected because it was filed after an inordinate five-year delay without a cogent explanation. The record showed negligence and no sufficient cause for the delay, the default, or the failure to prosecute the matter diligently. Restoration was therefore refused, and the earlier dismissal of the appeal remained undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 10:42:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149987" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 643 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112971</link>
      <description>An application to restore an appeal dismissed for non-compliance and non-appearance was rejected because it was filed after an inordinate five-year delay without a cogent explanation. The record showed negligence and no sufficient cause for the delay, the default, or the failure to prosecute the matter diligently. Restoration was therefore refused, and the earlier dismissal of the appeal remained undisturbed.</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=112971</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>