<?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>2017 (8) TMI 819 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346761</link>
    <description>The appellant instructed counsel not to appear, and no one appeared on its behalf when the matter was taken up. In these circumstances, the Supreme Court dismissed the civil appeal for non-prosecution, noting that the appellant was expected to make necessary arrangements if it chose not to be represented by its counsel.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Aug 2017 07:31:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=486454" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 819 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346761</link>
      <description>The appellant instructed counsel not to appear, and no one appeared on its behalf when the matter was taken up. In these circumstances, the Supreme Court dismissed the civil appeal for non-prosecution, noting that the appellant was expected to make necessary arrangements if it chose not to be represented by its counsel.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346761</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>