<?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 (7) TMI 256 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50998</link>
    <description>A 31-day delay in filing an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was condoned because the assessee explained that the employee handling central excise matters suddenly left without handing over the papers, a disruption treated as beyond the organisation&#039;s control. On that basis, the appeal was remanded for fresh decision on merits, with directions to grant the assessee an opportunity of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Sep 2010 12:32:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89477" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (7) TMI 256 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50998</link>
      <description>A 31-day delay in filing an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was condoned because the assessee explained that the employee handling central excise matters suddenly left without handing over the papers, a disruption treated as beyond the organisation&#039;s control. On that basis, the appeal was remanded for fresh decision on merits, with directions to grant the assessee an opportunity of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50998</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>