<?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 764 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126958</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI scheduled the appeals for final hearing on a day-to-day basis on 13-7-2009, concerning the stay application for interim relief in an appeal related to the modification of the final finding of the Designated Authority, non-injurious price, injury margin, and corresponding anti-dumping duties. The Tribunal emphasized the urgency of resolving the matter promptly to prevent hardship to affected parties and ensure revenue interests. Additionally, the Tribunal expressed dissatisfaction with the absence of respondent No. 1, Union of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, during the proceedings, urging for improved cooperation in the future.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2013 18:34:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163844" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 764 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126958</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI scheduled the appeals for final hearing on a day-to-day basis on 13-7-2009, concerning the stay application for interim relief in an appeal related to the modification of the final finding of the Designated Authority, non-injurious price, injury margin, and corresponding anti-dumping duties. The Tribunal emphasized the urgency of resolving the matter promptly to prevent hardship to affected parties and ensure revenue interests. Additionally, the Tribunal expressed dissatisfaction with the absence of respondent No. 1, Union of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, during the proceedings, urging for improved cooperation in the future.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126958</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>