<?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>2024 (2) TMI 1661 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468294</link>
    <description>The writ petition was directed to be converted into an appropriate appeal under Section 35(G) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and listed before the Division Bench, while the question of maintainability was expressly left open. The order therefore addresses procedural routing rather than the substantive merits and preserves the parties&#039; ability to contest whether the appeal is maintainable at the later stage.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 15:43:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=898664" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 1661 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468294</link>
      <description>The writ petition was directed to be converted into an appropriate appeal under Section 35(G) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and listed before the Division Bench, while the question of maintainability was expressly left open. The order therefore addresses procedural routing rather than the substantive merits and preserves the parties&#039; ability to contest whether the appeal is maintainable at the later stage.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468294</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>