<?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>1983 (12) TMI 313 - CEGAT CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166868</link>
    <description>A customs appeal had to be filed within the statutory period under section 129A(3) of the Customs Act, 1962, and a one-day delay was sought to be excused on the ground that papers were misplaced in the office. The explanation was treated as insufficient because mere misplacement of papers did not amount to sufficient cause for condonation under section 129A(5). The delay was therefore not condoned, and the appeal was held to be barred by limitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2014 17:42:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=368520" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (12) TMI 313 - CEGAT CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166868</link>
      <description>A customs appeal had to be filed within the statutory period under section 129A(3) of the Customs Act, 1962, and a one-day delay was sought to be excused on the ground that papers were misplaced in the office. The explanation was treated as insufficient because mere misplacement of papers did not amount to sufficient cause for condonation under section 129A(5). The delay was therefore not condoned, and the appeal was held to be barred by limitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166868</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>