<?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 253 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33432</link>
    <description>The appeal was dismissed as time-barred due to a delay of three days in filing within the stipulated 60-day period. The President of the Tribunal set aside the dismissal, emphasizing that the delay was not deliberate and should have been condoned, directing the Commissioner to review the appeal on its merits without the requirement of pre-deposit. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of avoiding ex-parte decisions and ensuring fair consideration for both parties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72064" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 253 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33432</link>
      <description>The appeal was dismissed as time-barred due to a delay of three days in filing within the stipulated 60-day period. The President of the Tribunal set aside the dismissal, emphasizing that the delay was not deliberate and should have been condoned, directing the Commissioner to review the appeal on its merits without the requirement of pre-deposit. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of avoiding ex-parte decisions and ensuring fair consideration for both parties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33432</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>