<?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>2022 (3) TMI 940 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419902</link>
    <description>An appeal under the Finance Act, 1994 was examined on the issue of limitation under Section 85(3A) in light of the COVID-19 extension and the Supreme Court&#039;s direction excluding the relevant limitation period. Because the filing dated 25.09.2020 fell within the extended/excluded period, the rejection of the appeal as time-barred was unsustainable. As the Commissioner (Appeals) had not examined the merits, the dispute was remitted for fresh appellate adjudication on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Mar 2022 08:38:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=673589" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (3) TMI 940 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419902</link>
      <description>An appeal under the Finance Act, 1994 was examined on the issue of limitation under Section 85(3A) in light of the COVID-19 extension and the Supreme Court&#039;s direction excluding the relevant limitation period. Because the filing dated 25.09.2020 fell within the extended/excluded period, the rejection of the appeal as time-barred was unsustainable. As the Commissioner (Appeals) had not examined the merits, the dispute was remitted for fresh appellate adjudication on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419902</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>