<?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 (4) TMI 1025 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176751</link>
    <description>The appeal was remanded to the original adjudicating authority due to the appellant&#039;s argument regarding the lack of supplied documents affecting their defense. The Tribunal directed the authority to provide all relied-upon documents, offer sufficient personal hearing opportunities, and issue a fresh order within three months. All issues were kept open for further consideration, emphasizing the need for a fair opportunity for the appellant to present their case effectively.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Dec 2015 21:08:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=410894" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 1025 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176751</link>
      <description>The appeal was remanded to the original adjudicating authority due to the appellant&#039;s argument regarding the lack of supplied documents affecting their defense. The Tribunal directed the authority to provide all relied-upon documents, offer sufficient personal hearing opportunities, and issue a fresh order within three months. All issues were kept open for further consideration, emphasizing the need for a fair opportunity for the appellant to present their case effectively.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176751</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>