<?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 (5) TMI 692 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193127</link>
    <description>Delay in filing the appeal was condoned, but the challenge failed because the Tribunal had followed its earlier decision on the same issue, and that relied-on precedent had not been appealed before the Supreme Court. In those circumstances, the unchallenged Tribunal ruling was treated as decisive for the present matter, leaving no basis to interfere with the Tribunal&#039;s order and resulting in dismissal of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Jul 2017 14:33:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=481249" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (5) TMI 692 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193127</link>
      <description>Delay in filing the appeal was condoned, but the challenge failed because the Tribunal had followed its earlier decision on the same issue, and that relied-on precedent had not been appealed before the Supreme Court. In those circumstances, the unchallenged Tribunal ruling was treated as decisive for the present matter, leaving no basis to interfere with the Tribunal&#039;s order and resulting in dismissal of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193127</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>