<?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>2008 (6) TMI 413 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123812</link>
    <description>An appeal should not be dismissed solely because a settlement application was pending when the application has since been rejected, leaving the appellant without a remedy before the Settlement Commission or the Commissioner (Appeals). Where the appellate authority has not decided the matter on merits, the dismissal cannot be sustained. The proper course is to set aside that order and remand the matter for a fresh decision in light of the subsequent development.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Sep 2012 17:04:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160772" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (6) TMI 413 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123812</link>
      <description>An appeal should not be dismissed solely because a settlement application was pending when the application has since been rejected, leaving the appellant without a remedy before the Settlement Commission or the Commissioner (Appeals). Where the appellate authority has not decided the matter on merits, the dismissal cannot be sustained. The proper course is to set aside that order and remand the matter for a fresh decision in light of the subsequent development.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123812</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>