TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the amended Section 21 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 applied to an appeal that was filed before the amendment but decided after its commencement; (ii) Whether the Appellate Tribunal could grant complete waiver of the statutory pre-deposit under the amended provision.
Issue (i): Whether the amended Section 21 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 applied to an appeal that was filed before the amendment but decided after its commencement.
Analysis: The appeal was pending when the statutory amendment came into force, but the order on waiver was passed thereafter. The amended provision governed the stage at which the appeal was being considered, and the earlier unamended provision could not continue to operate for deciding the pending application. The change in law was therefore applicable to the pending proceeding.
Conclusion: The amended Section 21 applied to the pending appeal.
Issue (ii): Whether the Appellate Tribunal could grant complete waiver of the statutory pre-deposit under the amended provision.
Analysis: After amendment, the statute permitted deposit of 50% of the debt due, with reduction only up to the prescribed minimum of 25% for recorded reasons. A complete waiver was no longer within the Tribunal's power. An order entertaining the appeal on the basis of total waiver, and on the further ground that the auction purchaser had already deposited the sale consideration, was contrary to the amended mandate.
Conclusion: The Appellate Tribunal had no jurisdiction to grant complete waiver of the pre-deposit.
Final Conclusion: The order granting full waiver was set aside, the challenge to that order succeeded, and the connected petition against the consequential order failed.
Ratio Decidendi: When a statutory amendment governing pre-deposit comes into force before the appeal is decided, the amended provision applies to the pending proceeding, and the appellate forum cannot waive the deposit beyond the minimum limit fixed by the amended statute.
TaxTMI 
