<?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 (8) TMI 587 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331203</link>
    <description>The Tribunal rejected both the condonation of delay in filing the ROM application and the rectification of mistake in the order under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The applications were deemed not maintainable as they were filed after the statutory time limit of six months from the order date. The Tribunal emphasized the significance of complying with statutory timelines and provisions in legal proceedings, leading to the rejection of both miscellaneous applications seeking relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2016 11:46:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=438378" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 587 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331203</link>
      <description>The Tribunal rejected both the condonation of delay in filing the ROM application and the rectification of mistake in the order under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The applications were deemed not maintainable as they were filed after the statutory time limit of six months from the order date. The Tribunal emphasized the significance of complying with statutory timelines and provisions in legal proceedings, leading to the rejection of both miscellaneous applications seeking relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331203</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>