<?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 (7) TMI 668 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261707</link>
    <description>The High Court quashed the impugned order and condoned the delay of 340 days in filing an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Court found the reasons for the delay genuine and not intentional, setting aside the delay and allowing the appeal to proceed based on medical reports and records supporting the delay reasons. The Tribunal was criticized for initially failing to consider the evidence and exercise its discretion in condoning the delay.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2015 09:47:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=390763" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (7) TMI 668 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261707</link>
      <description>The High Court quashed the impugned order and condoned the delay of 340 days in filing an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Court found the reasons for the delay genuine and not intentional, setting aside the delay and allowing the appeal to proceed based on medical reports and records supporting the delay reasons. The Tribunal was criticized for initially failing to consider the evidence and exercise its discretion in condoning the delay.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261707</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>