<?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>2011 (3) TMI 40 - CESTAT,  BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203060</link>
    <description>No sufficient ground was shown to modify the earlier stay order requiring pre-deposit, so the modification request was dismissed. The Tribunal also noted non-compliance with the pre-deposit direction and, on that basis, dismissed the appeal. The operative principle stated is that where an assessee fails to establish any sufficient basis for altering a pre-deposit order, continued non-compliance with that direction justifies dismissal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 09:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176629" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 40 - CESTAT,  BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203060</link>
      <description>No sufficient ground was shown to modify the earlier stay order requiring pre-deposit, so the modification request was dismissed. The Tribunal also noted non-compliance with the pre-deposit direction and, on that basis, dismissed the appeal. The operative principle stated is that where an assessee fails to establish any sufficient basis for altering a pre-deposit order, continued non-compliance with that direction justifies dismissal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203060</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>