Section 7 admission requires established financial debt and default, not precise interest quantification, while post-suspension defaults remain action...
Belated Form 10B filing during Covid-19 cannot defeat charitable exemption where genuine hardship warrants condonation and substantial justice prevail...
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance with the statutory requirement of making the pre-deposit. After an amendment on August 6, 2014, neither the Tribunal nor the Commissioner (Appeals) had the power to waive the pre-deposit requirement u/s 35F of the Central Excise Act. The Supreme Court's decision in Narayan Chandra Ghosh vs. UCO Bank emphasized that when a statute confers the right to appeal, conditions can be imposed, and unless the condition precedent of filing an appeal is fulfilled, the appeal cannot be entertained. Since the appellant failed to make the required pre-deposit, the Tribunal could not permit the maintenance of the appeal.
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance with the statutory requirement of making the pre-deposit. After an amendment on August 6, 2014, neither the Tribunal nor the Commissioner (Appeals) had the power to waive the pre-deposit requirement u/s 35F of the Central Excise Act. The Supreme Court's decision in Narayan Chandra Ghosh vs. UCO Bank emphasized that when a statute confers the right to appeal, conditions can be imposed, and unless the condition precedent of filing an appeal is fulfilled, the appeal cannot be entertained. Since the appellant failed to make the required pre-deposit, the Tribunal could not permit the maintenance of the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
