<?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>2007 (4) TMI 696 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175136</link>
    <description>The appeal arising from dismissal under the proviso to Section 35F of the CE Act for non-compliance of an Interim Order regarding delayed payment of Service Tax was allowed. The Tribunal found the dismissal unjustified as the issue had been previously decided by the Hon&#039;ble President in a Final Order. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh consideration within four months, applying the Tribunal&#039;s previous ruling.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2015 15:33:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=404636" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (4) TMI 696 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175136</link>
      <description>The appeal arising from dismissal under the proviso to Section 35F of the CE Act for non-compliance of an Interim Order regarding delayed payment of Service Tax was allowed. The Tribunal found the dismissal unjustified as the issue had been previously decided by the Hon&#039;ble President in a Final Order. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh consideration within four months, applying the Tribunal&#039;s previous ruling.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175136</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>