<?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>2006 (1) TMI 505 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119026</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remand, emphasizing the importance of considering the circumstances and the party&#039;s conduct in determining the delay in filing the appeal. It highlighted the need to ensure the assessee was not prejudiced due to technicalities and directed the Commissioner (Appeals) to review the appeal on its merits, focusing on the original filing date rather than the date of the duplicate appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Jul 2012 15:07:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156023" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 505 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119026</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remand, emphasizing the importance of considering the circumstances and the party&#039;s conduct in determining the delay in filing the appeal. It highlighted the need to ensure the assessee was not prejudiced due to technicalities and directed the Commissioner (Appeals) to review the appeal on its merits, focusing on the original filing date rather than the date of the duplicate appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119026</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>