<?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 (7) TMI 916 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363608</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant against an Adjudication Order, ruling it as not maintainable due to the appellant&#039;s failure to file an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) as per the proviso to Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal found that since the appellant had agreed with the Adjudication Order and did not challenge it earlier, the appeal before the Tribunal lacked maintainability. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed based on this ground, concluding the matter.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2018 14:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=527030" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 916 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363608</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant against an Adjudication Order, ruling it as not maintainable due to the appellant&#039;s failure to file an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) as per the proviso to Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal found that since the appellant had agreed with the Adjudication Order and did not challenge it earlier, the appeal before the Tribunal lacked maintainability. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed based on this ground, concluding the matter.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363608</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>