<?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 303 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203852</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi, considered a matter remitted by the Supreme Court for de novo consideration of the issue of differential duty. The Supreme Court directed expeditious disposal and required both parties to appear before the Tribunal for final disposal. Despite the appellant&#039;s absence, the respondent sought an adjournment, believing only parties needed to appear. The Tribunal clarified that both parties must attend for timely resolution. Consequently, the matter was adjourned to 21.1.2011 with strict instructions for prompt adjudication, ensuring compliance with the Supreme Court&#039;s directive.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2011 17:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177403" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (1) TMI 303 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203852</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi, considered a matter remitted by the Supreme Court for de novo consideration of the issue of differential duty. The Supreme Court directed expeditious disposal and required both parties to appear before the Tribunal for final disposal. Despite the appellant&#039;s absence, the respondent sought an adjournment, believing only parties needed to appear. The Tribunal clarified that both parties must attend for timely resolution. Consequently, the matter was adjourned to 21.1.2011 with strict instructions for prompt adjudication, ensuring compliance with the Supreme Court&#039;s directive.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203852</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>