<?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 (10) TMI 1148 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175148</link>
    <description>Delay was condoned, and the Special Leave Petitions were dismissed in view of the Supreme Court&#039;s earlier decision in Jawahar Mills. The order indicates that the Court treated the prior precedent as dispositive for the present excise dispute, so no separate relief was granted in these petitions. The only operative legal effect stated is dismissal of the petitions after condonation of delay.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2015 11:26:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=404670" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (10) TMI 1148 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175148</link>
      <description>Delay was condoned, and the Special Leave Petitions were dismissed in view of the Supreme Court&#039;s earlier decision in Jawahar Mills. The order indicates that the Court treated the prior precedent as dispositive for the present excise dispute, so no separate relief was granted in these petitions. The only operative legal effect stated is dismissal of the petitions after condonation of delay.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175148</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>