<?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 (5) TMI 975 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360411</link>
    <description>A condonation application must be filed before the forum where the delay actually occurred; a request relating to delay in filing an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) could not be entertained by the Tribunal. The Tribunal also noted that the appeal before it was itself delayed by about nine months, and no separate condonation application was filed to explain that delay. On that basis, the application was held not maintainable and the appeal was dismissed for delay.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 May 2018 05:53:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=520586" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 975 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360411</link>
      <description>A condonation application must be filed before the forum where the delay actually occurred; a request relating to delay in filing an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) could not be entertained by the Tribunal. The Tribunal also noted that the appeal before it was itself delayed by about nine months, and no separate condonation application was filed to explain that delay. On that basis, the application was held not maintainable and the appeal was dismissed for delay.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360411</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>