<?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>2008 (2) TMI 956 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297518</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court recorded that the appeals disclosed no ground for interference and dismissed them as devoid of merit. The special leave petition was also dismissed on two independent bases: delay and lack of merit, so leave was refused both procedurally and substantively. The Court further stated that any question of law arising from the proceedings was left open for future determination and was not finally decided in this order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2021 11:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=655176" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 956 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297518</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court recorded that the appeals disclosed no ground for interference and dismissed them as devoid of merit. The special leave petition was also dismissed on two independent bases: delay and lack of merit, so leave was refused both procedurally and substantively. The Court further stated that any question of law arising from the proceedings was left open for future determination and was not finally decided in this order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297518</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>