<?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>2018 (2) TMI 468 - CESTAT, ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355047</link>
    <description>A Revenue appeal against the order dated 08.12.2011 was found infructuous because the same order had already been separately challenged, remanded, and the remand proceedings were later finalised, bringing the matter back before the Tribunal. As no live controversy survived for adjudication, the appeal was dismissed as otiose.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2018 07:45:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=508214" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 468 - CESTAT, ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355047</link>
      <description>A Revenue appeal against the order dated 08.12.2011 was found infructuous because the same order had already been separately challenged, remanded, and the remand proceedings were later finalised, bringing the matter back before the Tribunal. As no live controversy survived for adjudication, the appeal was dismissed as otiose.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355047</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>