<?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 (4) TMI 435 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119639</link>
    <description>The Tribunal directed the Commissioner (Appeals) to consider the initial filing date of the appeal as the date of filing, despite procedural defects. The Tribunal emphasized that the appeal should be assessed on its merits after rectifying the defects and condoning the 15-day delay. As a result, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, remanding the case for further consideration and disposing of the stay petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Jul 2012 13:06:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156635" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (4) TMI 435 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119639</link>
      <description>The Tribunal directed the Commissioner (Appeals) to consider the initial filing date of the appeal as the date of filing, despite procedural defects. The Tribunal emphasized that the appeal should be assessed on its merits after rectifying the defects and condoning the 15-day delay. As a result, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, remanding the case for further consideration and disposing of the stay petition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119639</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>