<?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 202 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30144</link>
    <description>Repeated failure to produce the Order-in-Original and the relevant agreement justified refusal to hear the appeal on merits. After multiple opportunities, the Tribunal held that these documents were essential for effective adjudication and, applying Rule 11 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, declined to proceed further. The appeal was rejected, but liberty was granted to seek restoration by filing a miscellaneous application upon production of the required documents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68802" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 202 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30144</link>
      <description>Repeated failure to produce the Order-in-Original and the relevant agreement justified refusal to hear the appeal on merits. After multiple opportunities, the Tribunal held that these documents were essential for effective adjudication and, applying Rule 11 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, declined to proceed further. The appeal was rejected, but liberty was granted to seek restoration by filing a miscellaneous application upon production of the required documents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30144</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>