<?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>2013 (1) TMI 57 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219951</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed appeals for non-prosecution due to the appellants&#039; repeated failure to appear. Despite the appellants&#039; claim of being unaware of the hearing due to an employee&#039;s negligence, the Tribunal found their explanation insufficient. The Tribunal ordered restoration of the appeals on a cost basis, directing the appellants to pay Rs.5000/- for each appeal within four weeks. Compliance would result in the restoration of the appeals and stay applications.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2013 10:04:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=193320" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (1) TMI 57 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219951</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed appeals for non-prosecution due to the appellants&#039; repeated failure to appear. Despite the appellants&#039; claim of being unaware of the hearing due to an employee&#039;s negligence, the Tribunal found their explanation insufficient. The Tribunal ordered restoration of the appeals on a cost basis, directing the appellants to pay Rs.5000/- for each appeal within four weeks. Compliance would result in the restoration of the appeals and stay applications.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219951</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>