<?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 (8) TMI 217 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32952</link>
    <description>An order directing pre-deposit and rejecting a modification request was set aside because no personal hearing had been afforded before the decision. The matter had not been decided on merits, so the proper course was reconsideration after giving the appellant a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The appeals were therefore remanded for fresh consideration, and pre-deposit was not insisted upon pending that reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=71589" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 217 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32952</link>
      <description>An order directing pre-deposit and rejecting a modification request was set aside because no personal hearing had been afforded before the decision. The matter had not been decided on merits, so the proper course was reconsideration after giving the appellant a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The appeals were therefore remanded for fresh consideration, and pre-deposit was not insisted upon pending that reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32952</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>