<?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>1995 (11) TMI 380 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152031</link>
    <description>The appellate provision permitted an appeal within 45 days of service, with a further 15 days available only on sufficient cause, creating a strict 60-day outer limit. Because the appeal was received after that ceiling, the Tribunal held that it had no authority to condone the delay or invoke any inherent power to extend time beyond the express statutory limit. The filing was therefore treated as time-barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 09:50:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169069" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (11) TMI 380 - APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR FORFEITED PROPERTY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152031</link>
      <description>The appellate provision permitted an appeal within 45 days of service, with a further 15 days available only on sufficient cause, creating a strict 60-day outer limit. Because the appeal was received after that ceiling, the Tribunal held that it had no authority to condone the delay or invoke any inherent power to extend time beyond the express statutory limit. The filing was therefore treated as time-barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152031</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>