<?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>2010 (1) TMI 996 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152563</link>
    <description>Once the Tribunal has exercised jurisdiction to decide waiver or pre-deposit, it cannot later reopen, modify, or recall that order through a fresh modification request. The applicant&#039;s plea that it had not been heard and that counsel was absent for medical reasons failed because the Revenue had already been heard when the stay order was passed. The application was therefore found to lack merit, and the earlier order was left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Jul 2013 15:46:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169600" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (1) TMI 996 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152563</link>
      <description>Once the Tribunal has exercised jurisdiction to decide waiver or pre-deposit, it cannot later reopen, modify, or recall that order through a fresh modification request. The applicant&#039;s plea that it had not been heard and that counsel was absent for medical reasons failed because the Revenue had already been heard when the stay order was passed. The application was therefore found to lack merit, and the earlier order was left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152563</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>