<?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>2001 (9) TMI 1131 - CEGAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173938</link>
    <description>An appeal should not be rejected for non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement unless the appellant has been given an opportunity to comply. Where the record did not clearly show that such an opportunity had been afforded before dismissal, the matter was remanded to the first appellate authority. The authority was directed to grant an opportunity before taking any fresh decision on rejection for non-compliance and then pass a fresh order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2015 10:26:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=398770" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (9) TMI 1131 - CEGAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173938</link>
      <description>An appeal should not be rejected for non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement unless the appellant has been given an opportunity to comply. Where the record did not clearly show that such an opportunity had been afforded before dismissal, the matter was remanded to the first appellate authority. The authority was directed to grant an opportunity before taking any fresh decision on rejection for non-compliance and then pass a fresh order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173938</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>