<?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>1990 (9) TMI 280 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102072</link>
    <description>Delay in filing an appeal under section 54 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was examined through the settled liberal construction of &quot;sufficient cause&quot;, with recognition that governmental delay must be viewed in light of collective decision-making. The Court treated the public interest element, the foreign exchange stake, later reconsideration, and circumstances casting doubt on the earlier choice not to appeal as adequate grounds for condonation. Objections based on an earlier conscious decision, absence of a specific plea of bad faith, and alleged insufficiency of proof were not accepted on the totality of circumstances, and the delay was condoned.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 16:21:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139121" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (9) TMI 280 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102072</link>
      <description>Delay in filing an appeal under section 54 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was examined through the settled liberal construction of &quot;sufficient cause&quot;, with recognition that governmental delay must be viewed in light of collective decision-making. The Court treated the public interest element, the foreign exchange stake, later reconsideration, and circumstances casting doubt on the earlier choice not to appeal as adequate grounds for condonation. Objections based on an earlier conscious decision, absence of a specific plea of bad faith, and alleged insufficiency of proof were not accepted on the totality of circumstances, and the delay was condoned.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102072</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>