<?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 (4) TMI 1171 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212613</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) to be genuine, as it was due to the Manager (Accounts) leaving the job without preparing the appeal papers. The Commissioner (Appeals) had dismissed the appeal as time-barred, but the Tribunal set aside this decision, remanding the matter for a decision on merits. The delay of 59 days was condoned, and the appeal was deemed not time-barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 18:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=186017" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (4) TMI 1171 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212613</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) to be genuine, as it was due to the Manager (Accounts) leaving the job without preparing the appeal papers. The Commissioner (Appeals) had dismissed the appeal as time-barred, but the Tribunal set aside this decision, remanding the matter for a decision on merits. The delay of 59 days was condoned, and the appeal was deemed not time-barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212613</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>