<?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>2008 (2) TMI 85 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4420</link>
    <description>The application for restoration of the appeal was dismissed by the Bench as the applicants failed to establish sufficient cause for their non-appearance and subsequent request for a fresh hearing. The judgment emphasized the importance of monitoring appeal listings and engaging appropriate representation, ultimately upholding the dismissal based on the lack of a valid reason for the recall of the order passed on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Feb 2009 12:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43763" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 85 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4420</link>
      <description>The application for restoration of the appeal was dismissed by the Bench as the applicants failed to establish sufficient cause for their non-appearance and subsequent request for a fresh hearing. The judgment emphasized the importance of monitoring appeal listings and engaging appropriate representation, ultimately upholding the dismissal based on the lack of a valid reason for the recall of the order passed on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4420</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>