<?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 (8) TMI 208 -  ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201622</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the decision of the Customs Excise &amp;amp; Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, ruling that the Commissioner (Appeals) did not have the authority to condone delays beyond the specified 30-day period for filing an appeal under the Central Excise Act. Despite the appellant&#039;s plea for leniency on humanitarian grounds due to filing the appeal on the 31st day, the Court found the dismissal of the appeal to be legal and emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory timelines for appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2011 23:10:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175226" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (8) TMI 208 -  ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201622</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the decision of the Customs Excise &amp;amp; Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, ruling that the Commissioner (Appeals) did not have the authority to condone delays beyond the specified 30-day period for filing an appeal under the Central Excise Act. Despite the appellant&#039;s plea for leniency on humanitarian grounds due to filing the appeal on the 31st day, the Court found the dismissal of the appeal to be legal and emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory timelines for appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201622</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>