<?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>2010 (6) TMI 805 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182343</link>
    <description>The Court allowed the appeal by the Cooperative Spinning Mill in liquidation, setting aside CESTAT&#039;s rejection of condonation of delay. It held that notices should have been served on the Official Liquidator, not the Managing Director, during liquidation. The appeal was directed to proceed on payment of costs, emphasizing the significance of proper service during liquidation and communication with the authorized officer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 May 2016 15:28:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=427369" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (6) TMI 805 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182343</link>
      <description>The Court allowed the appeal by the Cooperative Spinning Mill in liquidation, setting aside CESTAT&#039;s rejection of condonation of delay. It held that notices should have been served on the Official Liquidator, not the Managing Director, during liquidation. The appeal was directed to proceed on payment of costs, emphasizing the significance of proper service during liquidation and communication with the authorized officer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182343</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>