<?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 (1) TMI 970 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175384</link>
    <description>Delay was condoned, but the appeal became infructuous because the review application had already been allowed, the impugned order had been set aside, and the matter had been reconsidered afresh by the Tribunal. The Supreme Court therefore dismissed the appeal without examining the substantive controversy.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2015 16:03:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=405769" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (1) TMI 970 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175384</link>
      <description>Delay was condoned, but the appeal became infructuous because the review application had already been allowed, the impugned order had been set aside, and the matter had been reconsidered afresh by the Tribunal. The Supreme Court therefore dismissed the appeal without examining the substantive controversy.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175384</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>