<?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>2009 (4) TMI 589 - CESTAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125474</link>
    <description>Revenue appeal maintainability was examined in light of the committee note sheet and review order. The Tribunal noted that the appeal had been filed pursuant to the direction in the committee note sheet and that one Member of the Committee of Commissioners had already filed the appeal before the Tribunal. On that basis, it held that no further authorisation was required for the filing, and the Revenue&#039;s application was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:23:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=162391" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 589 - CESTAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125474</link>
      <description>Revenue appeal maintainability was examined in light of the committee note sheet and review order. The Tribunal noted that the appeal had been filed pursuant to the direction in the committee note sheet and that one Member of the Committee of Commissioners had already filed the appeal before the Tribunal. On that basis, it held that no further authorisation was required for the filing, and the Revenue&#039;s application was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125474</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>