<?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 (7) TMI 741 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235583</link>
    <description>The appeal by a government undertaking against Service Tax demands for activities under &#039;Consulting Engineer&#039;s Service&#039; was dismissed due to a delay of 579 days in filing the appeal. The Bench found the appellant&#039;s reasons of a managerial vacancy and lack of legal expertise unsatisfactory. Ignorance of the law and government department vacancies were not considered valid excuses for the delay. The Bench emphasized the importance of providing adequate explanations for delays, rejected the COD applications, and subsequently dismissed the appeals and stay applications, underscoring the necessity of complying with statutory time limits and obtaining proper legal representation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2014 15:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=197993" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (7) TMI 741 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235583</link>
      <description>The appeal by a government undertaking against Service Tax demands for activities under &#039;Consulting Engineer&#039;s Service&#039; was dismissed due to a delay of 579 days in filing the appeal. The Bench found the appellant&#039;s reasons of a managerial vacancy and lack of legal expertise unsatisfactory. Ignorance of the law and government department vacancies were not considered valid excuses for the delay. The Bench emphasized the importance of providing adequate explanations for delays, rejected the COD applications, and subsequently dismissed the appeals and stay applications, underscoring the necessity of complying with statutory time limits and obtaining proper legal representation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235583</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>