<?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 (8) TMI 786 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262869</link>
    <description>Where the appellate tribunal had already remanded certain aspects of the matter to the Commissioner for fresh adjudication, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with that order and dismissed the appeal. The Court noted the existing remand and the absence of representation for the appellant, and it did not undertake any independent adjudication on the remanded issues. The impugned tribunal order was therefore left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=394150" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 786 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262869</link>
      <description>Where the appellate tribunal had already remanded certain aspects of the matter to the Commissioner for fresh adjudication, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with that order and dismissed the appeal. The Court noted the existing remand and the absence of representation for the appellant, and it did not undertake any independent adjudication on the remanded issues. The impugned tribunal order was therefore left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262869</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>