<?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>2009 (3) TMI 2 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32548</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal challenging the Customs Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision on the waiver of duty amount and penalty under Rule 16(a) of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995. Despite financial hardship, the appellants failed to comply with orders, engaged in dilatory tactics for years, and did not address the rule&#039;s applicability earlier. The Court found their conduct abusive, leading to dismissal without considering merits. Emphasizing compliance with legal orders and avoiding delays, the appeal was rejected without costs, underscoring the need for procedural adherence in legal proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 17:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=71188" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (3) TMI 2 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32548</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal challenging the Customs Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision on the waiver of duty amount and penalty under Rule 16(a) of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995. Despite financial hardship, the appellants failed to comply with orders, engaged in dilatory tactics for years, and did not address the rule&#039;s applicability earlier. The Court found their conduct abusive, leading to dismissal without considering merits. Emphasizing compliance with legal orders and avoiding delays, the appeal was rejected without costs, underscoring the need for procedural adherence in legal proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32548</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>