TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
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
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appeal was liable to be dismissed for failure to comply with the pre-deposit condition imposed under the statutory scheme governing appeals under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973.
Analysis: Section 52(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 requires deposit of the penalty amount before an appeal is entertained, unless the Tribunal dispenses with such deposit on the ground of undue hardship. The appellant had been granted time to make the pre-deposit but failed to comply with the conditional order and also did not appear to explain the default. In these circumstances, the Tribunal held that there was no bona fide compliance and that it could not ignore the consequence expressly attached to the conditional order. The Tribunal also reiterated that it could not rewrite the statutory requirement on equitable considerations.
Conclusion: The appeal was liable to be dismissed for non-compliance with the pre-deposit condition, and the dismissal was warranted.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed on account of breach of the mandatory condition attached to the grant of appellate indulgence.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute requires pre-deposit for an appeal and the appellant fails to comply with a conditional order dispensing with or directing such deposit, the appeal is liable to be dismissed unless the statutory requirement is lawfully waived on the ground of undue hardship.
TaxTMI 
