<?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>2012 (11) TMI 783 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218768</link>
    <description>The tribunal condoned a 13-day delay in filing an appeal, directing acceptance of stay petitions and appeals. For waiver of pre-deposit of penalties under the Customs Act, 1962, the tribunal required a specified deposit by a certain date due to non-appearance of the appellant. Emphasizing cooperation, the tribunal highlighted the importance of declaring material facts and engaging in adjudicating proceedings. The appellant&#039;s failure to appear before the adjudicating authority was deemed careless, stressing the need for compliance with procedural requirements. Compliance with the directed deposit was linked to setting aside the impugned order and remanding the matter for reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 25 Nov 2012 10:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192139" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (11) TMI 783 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218768</link>
      <description>The tribunal condoned a 13-day delay in filing an appeal, directing acceptance of stay petitions and appeals. For waiver of pre-deposit of penalties under the Customs Act, 1962, the tribunal required a specified deposit by a certain date due to non-appearance of the appellant. Emphasizing cooperation, the tribunal highlighted the importance of declaring material facts and engaging in adjudicating proceedings. The appellant&#039;s failure to appear before the adjudicating authority was deemed careless, stressing the need for compliance with procedural requirements. Compliance with the directed deposit was linked to setting aside the impugned order and remanding the matter for reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218768</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>