<?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>2007 (2) TMI 572 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124343</link>
    <description>A recall application against a Tribunal final order was rejected because counsel did not appear, and no request for adjournment or pass over was made. The Tribunal found that the earlier appeal had been disposed of on merits after considering the facts and grounds raised, so there was no basis to set aside a merits order merely on account of non-appearance. The applicants were, however, left free to challenge the Tribunal&#039;s order before the appropriate higher appellate forum.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2012 11:48:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=161292" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (2) TMI 572 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124343</link>
      <description>A recall application against a Tribunal final order was rejected because counsel did not appear, and no request for adjournment or pass over was made. The Tribunal found that the earlier appeal had been disposed of on merits after considering the facts and grounds raised, so there was no basis to set aside a merits order merely on account of non-appearance. The applicants were, however, left free to challenge the Tribunal&#039;s order before the appropriate higher appellate forum.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124343</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>