<?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>2011 (9) TMI 1165 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199779</link>
    <description>The CESTAT records that no one appeared for the appellants when the matters were called and no adjournment was sought. The notice sent to the appellant firm at the address in the appeal memorandum was returned with the postal endorsement &quot;left&quot;. On these facts, the appeals were dismissed for non-prosecution.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Mar 2018 18:10:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512297" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (9) TMI 1165 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199779</link>
      <description>The CESTAT records that no one appeared for the appellants when the matters were called and no adjournment was sought. The notice sent to the appellant firm at the address in the appeal memorandum was returned with the postal endorsement &quot;left&quot;. On these facts, the appeals were dismissed for non-prosecution.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199779</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>