<?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>2020 (7) TMI 263 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396594</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the second restoration application due to inadequate justification for the delay and non-appearance, emphasizing the Appellant&#039;s lack of diligence and responsibility in pursuing the appeal and subsequent applications. The Tribunal&#039;s decision underscored the importance of timely and proactive legal representation in appellate proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Jul 2020 16:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=617233" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (7) TMI 263 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396594</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the second restoration application due to inadequate justification for the delay and non-appearance, emphasizing the Appellant&#039;s lack of diligence and responsibility in pursuing the appeal and subsequent applications. The Tribunal&#039;s decision underscored the importance of timely and proactive legal representation in appellate proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396594</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>