<?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>2002 (12) TMI 184 - CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51782</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the Commissioner (Appeals) does not have the authority to condone delays in filing appeals beyond the specified period under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. Relying on the principles established by the Supreme Court and aligning with the Division Bench decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, the Tribunal concluded that the Commissioner (Appeals) correctly refused to extend the appeal period, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2010 12:03:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90260" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (12) TMI 184 - CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51782</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the Commissioner (Appeals) does not have the authority to condone delays in filing appeals beyond the specified period under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. Relying on the principles established by the Supreme Court and aligning with the Division Bench decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, the Tribunal concluded that the Commissioner (Appeals) correctly refused to extend the appeal period, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51782</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>