<?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>2010 (8) TMI 1111 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274748</link>
    <description>Delay was condoned, and the Supreme Court permitted withdrawal of the special leave petition after counsel stated that an appeal had already been filed against the impugned judgment. The petition was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn, with no adjudication on the merits of the underlying central excise dispute.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2018 09:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=532769" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (8) TMI 1111 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274748</link>
      <description>Delay was condoned, and the Supreme Court permitted withdrawal of the special leave petition after counsel stated that an appeal had already been filed against the impugned judgment. The petition was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn, with no adjudication on the merits of the underlying central excise dispute.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274748</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>