<?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 (8) TMI 1309 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185419</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal due to insufficient evidence supporting the partner&#039;s retirement from the firm and lack of diligence in providing verifiable information about the impugned order. The appeal was subsequently dismissed, highlighting the importance of presenting concrete evidence to substantiate claims in legal proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2016 12:27:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=438094" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 1309 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185419</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal due to insufficient evidence supporting the partner&#039;s retirement from the firm and lack of diligence in providing verifiable information about the impugned order. The appeal was subsequently dismissed, highlighting the importance of presenting concrete evidence to substantiate claims in legal proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185419</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>