<?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>2011 (7) TMI 1102 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170652</link>
    <description>Delay was condoned, but the Supreme Court found that no question of law arose from the impugned judgment and dismissed the central excise appeal accordingly. The order reflects only that the Court, after hearing counsel, declined further consideration on the ground that the case did not warrant examination of any legal issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 Dec 2015 15:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=386988" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (7) TMI 1102 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170652</link>
      <description>Delay was condoned, but the Supreme Court found that no question of law arose from the impugned judgment and dismissed the central excise appeal accordingly. The order reflects only that the Court, after hearing counsel, declined further consideration on the ground that the case did not warrant examination of any legal issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170652</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>