<?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>1993 (1) TMI 89 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43526</link>
    <description>The High Court set aside the Tribunal&#039;s order declining to condone the delay in filing an appeal against the non-refund of excise duty. The Court found the delay justifiable due to a subsequent notification impacting duty payment, directing the restoration of the appeal for further consideration. The Court emphasized the Tribunal&#039;s failure to properly exercise its jurisdiction and accepted the petitioner&#039;s reasons for the delay as sufficient.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:41:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=82055" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (1) TMI 89 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43526</link>
      <description>The High Court set aside the Tribunal&#039;s order declining to condone the delay in filing an appeal against the non-refund of excise duty. The Court found the delay justifiable due to a subsequent notification impacting duty payment, directing the restoration of the appeal for further consideration. The Court emphasized the Tribunal&#039;s failure to properly exercise its jurisdiction and accepted the petitioner&#039;s reasons for the delay as sufficient.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43526</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>