<?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>2015 (6) TMI 909 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260984</link>
    <description>Condonation of a 245-day delay was refused because the explanation was found unsatisfactory, and the civil appeals were dismissed on that procedural ground. The Court did not decide the substantive central excise issue and expressly kept that issue alive for determination in an appropriate case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2015 06:32:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=388682" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (6) TMI 909 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260984</link>
      <description>Condonation of a 245-day delay was refused because the explanation was found unsatisfactory, and the civil appeals were dismissed on that procedural ground. The Court did not decide the substantive central excise issue and expressly kept that issue alive for determination in an appropriate case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260984</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>