<?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>1985 (8) TMI 363 - CEGAT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167480</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the appeal filed on 21-5-1985 was within the three-month time limit for filing appeals under Section 129-A of the Customs Act, 1962. As the department failed to prove the date of order communication, the applicant&#039;s receipt of the order on 22-2-1985 was considered the communication date. Consequently, the appeal was deemed timely filed, and the application for condonation of delay was disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2014 10:50:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=371849" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (8) TMI 363 - CEGAT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167480</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the appeal filed on 21-5-1985 was within the three-month time limit for filing appeals under Section 129-A of the Customs Act, 1962. As the department failed to prove the date of order communication, the applicant&#039;s receipt of the order on 22-2-1985 was considered the communication date. Consequently, the appeal was deemed timely filed, and the application for condonation of delay was disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167480</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>