<?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 (9) TMI 223 - Calcutta High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251197</link>
    <description>The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to dismiss the appellant&#039;s application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal related to a show cause notice under the Central Excise Act. Despite citing erroneous legal advice causing the delay and relying on Supreme Court judgments, the Court emphasized the limited scope of appeal and the unique circumstances of each case. The Court highlighted the need for strict adherence to procedural requirements and upheld the Tribunal&#039;s reasoned decision, stating that interference based solely on a different view is unwarranted. The appellant was advised to explore other available legal remedies.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 07 Sep 2014 08:20:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=364679" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (9) TMI 223 - Calcutta High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251197</link>
      <description>The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to dismiss the appellant&#039;s application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal related to a show cause notice under the Central Excise Act. Despite citing erroneous legal advice causing the delay and relying on Supreme Court judgments, the Court emphasized the limited scope of appeal and the unique circumstances of each case. The Court highlighted the need for strict adherence to procedural requirements and upheld the Tribunal&#039;s reasoned decision, stating that interference based solely on a different view is unwarranted. The appellant was advised to explore other available legal remedies.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251197</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>