<?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>2001 (4) TMI 89 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45921</link>
    <description>The appeal, initially dismissed for non-prosecution under the Central Excise Act, was restored for fresh disposal on merits. The Tribunal&#039;s power to dismiss appeals for non-appearance was restricted, emphasizing the need to decide on the issues in controversy. The judgment highlighted the importance of disposing of appeals on merits and allowing restoration for sufficient cause. The Gujarat High Court&#039;s decision supported this stance, leading to the setting aside of the dismissal order and the direction for prompt hearing to avoid delays. The petition was partially allowed in favor of the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2010 15:53:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=84447" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (4) TMI 89 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45921</link>
      <description>The appeal, initially dismissed for non-prosecution under the Central Excise Act, was restored for fresh disposal on merits. The Tribunal&#039;s power to dismiss appeals for non-appearance was restricted, emphasizing the need to decide on the issues in controversy. The judgment highlighted the importance of disposing of appeals on merits and allowing restoration for sufficient cause. The Gujarat High Court&#039;s decision supported this stance, leading to the setting aside of the dismissal order and the direction for prompt hearing to avoid delays. The petition was partially allowed in favor of the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45921</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>