<?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>2014 (3) TMI 411 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244956</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the application for Condonation of Delay in filing the appeal and the stay application. The appellant&#039;s belief that the main appellant&#039;s appeal was sufficient to challenge the impugned order was not accepted as a valid reason for the delay. The Tribunal emphasized the requirement for separate appeals by each party and found the reason for delay unsatisfactory based on past cases, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal and stay application.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2014 06:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=348563" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 411 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244956</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the application for Condonation of Delay in filing the appeal and the stay application. The appellant&#039;s belief that the main appellant&#039;s appeal was sufficient to challenge the impugned order was not accepted as a valid reason for the delay. The Tribunal emphasized the requirement for separate appeals by each party and found the reason for delay unsatisfactory based on past cases, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal and stay application.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244956</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>