<?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>2007 (8) TMI 758 - CESTAT Bangalore</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185194</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Misc. application for condonation of delay, leading to the dismissal of the stay application and appeal as time-barred on 10.08.2007. The appellant&#039;s argument that the appeal was filed promptly upon receipt of the order was countered by the Revenue&#039;s evidence of dispatch via registered post, which the Tribunal deemed sufficient proof of service despite the absence of acknowledgment due.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:08:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=437169" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (8) TMI 758 - CESTAT Bangalore</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185194</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Misc. application for condonation of delay, leading to the dismissal of the stay application and appeal as time-barred on 10.08.2007. The appellant&#039;s argument that the appeal was filed promptly upon receipt of the order was countered by the Revenue&#039;s evidence of dispatch via registered post, which the Tribunal deemed sufficient proof of service despite the absence of acknowledgment due.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185194</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>