<?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 (11) TMI 199 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208246</link>
    <description>The Tribunal rejected one appeal due to conclusive evidence of delivery to the correct address but remanded two other appeals for further verification of delivery evidence under Section 37(C) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The decision emphasized the importance of proper service and timely receipt by authorized persons for appeals to be considered valid.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2012 16:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=181717" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (11) TMI 199 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208246</link>
      <description>The Tribunal rejected one appeal due to conclusive evidence of delivery to the correct address but remanded two other appeals for further verification of delivery evidence under Section 37(C) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The decision emphasized the importance of proper service and timely receipt by authorized persons for appeals to be considered valid.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208246</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>