<?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 (11) TMI 350 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114589</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the application as there was no representation during the appeal hearing, leading to the specific errors raised by the applicants not being argued before the Bench. Consequently, no errors apparent on the face of the records in the Tribunal&#039;s Final Order were established, and seeking a re-hearing through a Review of Order was deemed legally impermissible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 12:09:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151588" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (11) TMI 350 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114589</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the application as there was no representation during the appeal hearing, leading to the specific errors raised by the applicants not being argued before the Bench. Consequently, no errors apparent on the face of the records in the Tribunal&#039;s Final Order were established, and seeking a re-hearing through a Review of Order was deemed legally impermissible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114589</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>