<?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>1995 (7) TMI 183 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84436</link>
    <description>Where a statutory appeal under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was pending together with an application for dispensing with pre-deposit, coercive recovery of the penalty was treated as impermissible until the appellate authority acted on the appeal and connected application. The court directed the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal expeditiously, within twelve weeks, so that the appellant could pursue further remedies after the merits and deposit issue were decided.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2011 18:47:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121580" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (7) TMI 183 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84436</link>
      <description>Where a statutory appeal under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was pending together with an application for dispensing with pre-deposit, coercive recovery of the penalty was treated as impermissible until the appellate authority acted on the appeal and connected application. The court directed the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal expeditiously, within twelve weeks, so that the appellant could pursue further remedies after the merits and deposit issue were decided.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84436</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>