<?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 (8) TMI 556 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250606</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the application seeking extension of the stay order beyond 365 days under Section 35C(2A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Despite the delay in appeal disposal not being attributed to the appellant, the Tribunal held that no extension of stay could be granted based on interpretations by Karnataka and Delhi High Courts. The application was dismissed in line with the principles outlined in previous paragraphs and rulings of the High Courts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2014 16:21:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=363234" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (8) TMI 556 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250606</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the application seeking extension of the stay order beyond 365 days under Section 35C(2A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Despite the delay in appeal disposal not being attributed to the appellant, the Tribunal held that no extension of stay could be granted based on interpretations by Karnataka and Delhi High Courts. The application was dismissed in line with the principles outlined in previous paragraphs and rulings of the High Courts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250606</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>