<?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 (4) TMI 357 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358246</link>
    <description>The Tribunal restored an appeal that was dismissed due to non-delivery of hearing notices to the Advocate and applicant. Despite arguments against restoration, citing precedent, the Tribunal found that the notice was not sent to either party, resulting in an ex-parte order. Emphasizing the need to consider merits, the Tribunal recalled the order, restoring the appeal to its original status. The Tribunal allowed the application, scheduling the appeal to proceed accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2018 07:44:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=516308" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 357 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358246</link>
      <description>The Tribunal restored an appeal that was dismissed due to non-delivery of hearing notices to the Advocate and applicant. Despite arguments against restoration, citing precedent, the Tribunal found that the notice was not sent to either party, resulting in an ex-parte order. Emphasizing the need to consider merits, the Tribunal recalled the order, restoring the appeal to its original status. The Tribunal allowed the application, scheduling the appeal to proceed accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358246</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>