<?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>2005 (5) TMI 532 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116456</link>
    <description>An appeal may be dismissed for persistent non-compliance where defect memo objections remain unrectified, the appellant fails to appear, and directed duty and penalty payments are not made within the time allowed. The Tribunal treated repeated default, expiry of the compliance period, and the absence of any satisfactory basis for further adjournment as sufficient grounds to refuse to keep the appeal pending and dismiss it under Rule 11(2) of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2012 16:38:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153454" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (5) TMI 532 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116456</link>
      <description>An appeal may be dismissed for persistent non-compliance where defect memo objections remain unrectified, the appellant fails to appear, and directed duty and penalty payments are not made within the time allowed. The Tribunal treated repeated default, expiry of the compliance period, and the absence of any satisfactory basis for further adjournment as sufficient grounds to refuse to keep the appeal pending and dismiss it under Rule 11(2) of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116456</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>