<?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 (11) TMI 875 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268066</link>
    <description>The First Appellate Authority cannot condone delay beyond the statutory period for filing an appeal under the Central Excise Act. Service of the adjudication order by pasting it on the factory gate, in the presence of the company&#039;s security guard, was treated as the relevant service finding; the appeal, filed nearly six months later, remained beyond the condonable period. Applying the principle in Singh Enterprises, the Tribunal found no basis to restore the previously dismissed appeal. The adjournment request, based on parallel liquidation proceedings before the High Court, was also declined for want of sufficient cause.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2015 17:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=405780" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 875 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268066</link>
      <description>The First Appellate Authority cannot condone delay beyond the statutory period for filing an appeal under the Central Excise Act. Service of the adjudication order by pasting it on the factory gate, in the presence of the company&#039;s security guard, was treated as the relevant service finding; the appeal, filed nearly six months later, remained beyond the condonable period. Applying the principle in Singh Enterprises, the Tribunal found no basis to restore the previously dismissed appeal. The adjournment request, based on parallel liquidation proceedings before the High Court, was also declined for want of sufficient cause.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268066</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>