<?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 (6) TMI 796 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126489</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the application for condonation of delay, the stay application, and the appeal itself, as the 25-day delay in filing the appeal was not satisfactorily explained. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of an acceptable explanation for delays in filing appeals, citing a Supreme Court case that highlighted the need for a satisfactory explanation for delays. Despite submissions from both sides, the Tribunal found the explanation provided in this case unsatisfactory and relied on legal precedent to dismiss the applications and the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2012 14:32:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163382" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (6) TMI 796 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126489</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the application for condonation of delay, the stay application, and the appeal itself, as the 25-day delay in filing the appeal was not satisfactorily explained. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of an acceptable explanation for delays in filing appeals, citing a Supreme Court case that highlighted the need for a satisfactory explanation for delays. Despite submissions from both sides, the Tribunal found the explanation provided in this case unsatisfactory and relied on legal precedent to dismiss the applications and the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126489</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>