<?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 (1) TMI 287 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203778</link>
    <description>Ex parte orders passed by the original authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) were set aside because the appellant had not been effectively represented and a reasonable opportunity of hearing had not been secured. With no objection from the revenue to remand, the matter was sent back to the original authority for de novo adjudication to ensure proper hearing and fresh consideration on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2022 14:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177331" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (1) TMI 287 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203778</link>
      <description>Ex parte orders passed by the original authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) were set aside because the appellant had not been effectively represented and a reasonable opportunity of hearing had not been secured. With no objection from the revenue to remand, the matter was sent back to the original authority for de novo adjudication to ensure proper hearing and fresh consideration on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203778</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>