<?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>2016 (3) TMI 352 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325168</link>
    <description>Pre-deposit requirements for appellate hearing were modified because the dispute concerned only the quantum required as a condition for Tribunal appeal. A reduced deposit was considered sufficient in the circumstances. Since the appeal had been dismissed solely for failure to comply with the earlier pre-deposit condition, that dismissal was set aside. The Tribunal must hear the appeal on merits once the revised pre-deposit condition is met.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Mar 2016 09:12:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=419863" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 352 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325168</link>
      <description>Pre-deposit requirements for appellate hearing were modified because the dispute concerned only the quantum required as a condition for Tribunal appeal. A reduced deposit was considered sufficient in the circumstances. Since the appeal had been dismissed solely for failure to comply with the earlier pre-deposit condition, that dismissal was set aside. The Tribunal must hear the appeal on merits once the revised pre-deposit condition is met.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325168</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>