<?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>2004 (3) TMI 125 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52709</link>
    <description>The appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal due to a delay in filing appeals and improper service of the adjudication order. The appellant&#039;s argument that the order was not served properly as it was affixed to the factory gate without being sent through Registered A.D. was refuted by the Tribunal, which found evidence that the order was indeed sent through Registered A.D. The Tribunal emphasized the appellant&#039;s failure to inform the Revenue about the change of address and lack of evidence to support their claims. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed based on lack of proper communication and failure to inform the Revenue about the change of address.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2010 12:59:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91186" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 125 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52709</link>
      <description>The appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal due to a delay in filing appeals and improper service of the adjudication order. The appellant&#039;s argument that the order was not served properly as it was affixed to the factory gate without being sent through Registered A.D. was refuted by the Tribunal, which found evidence that the order was indeed sent through Registered A.D. The Tribunal emphasized the appellant&#039;s failure to inform the Revenue about the change of address and lack of evidence to support their claims. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed based on lack of proper communication and failure to inform the Revenue about the change of address.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52709</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>