<?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>2004 (12) TMI 678 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175834</link>
    <description>Delay was condoned, and the Supreme Court found no reason to interfere with the challenged order, so the civil appeal was dismissed. The text records only the final procedural outcome and does not state any substantive reasoning on the central excise issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2015 17:42:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=407864" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (12) TMI 678 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175834</link>
      <description>Delay was condoned, and the Supreme Court found no reason to interfere with the challenged order, so the civil appeal was dismissed. The text records only the final procedural outcome and does not state any substantive reasoning on the central excise issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175834</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>