<?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 (5) TMI 832 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247905</link>
    <description>The Tribunal rejected the Revenue&#039;s application to vacate the stay order and allowed the extension until the appeal&#039;s disposal, citing that not disposing of the appeal within the stipulated period would be unjust to the assessee. The Tribunal emphasized the Supreme Court&#039;s judgment in a similar case and noted the provision allowing for an extension under certain conditions. The decision was based on the principle that the assessee should not be penalized for delays in Tribunal proceedings beyond their control.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 May 2014 16:58:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=356342" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (5) TMI 832 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247905</link>
      <description>The Tribunal rejected the Revenue&#039;s application to vacate the stay order and allowed the extension until the appeal&#039;s disposal, citing that not disposing of the appeal within the stipulated period would be unjust to the assessee. The Tribunal emphasized the Supreme Court&#039;s judgment in a similar case and noted the provision allowing for an extension under certain conditions. The decision was based on the principle that the assessee should not be penalized for delays in Tribunal proceedings beyond their control.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Oct 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247905</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>