<?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 327 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34144</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, citing lack of proof of valid service of the original order. The decision was based on the appellant&#039;s affidavit declaring delayed receipt and absence of acknowledgment or delivery proof. The Tribunal distinguished a previous case and relied on Margra Industries case, ultimately granting the condonation of delay.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72771" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 327 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34144</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, citing lack of proof of valid service of the original order. The decision was based on the appellant&#039;s affidavit declaring delayed receipt and absence of acknowledgment or delivery proof. The Tribunal distinguished a previous case and relied on Margra Industries case, ultimately granting the condonation of delay.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34144</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>