https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202114 The High Court modified the tribunal's order, directing the petitioner to deposit Rs.2.5 crores by April 2011 for the appeal hearing, instead of the initial Rs.4 crores. The court emphasized that the financial hardship of the petitioner should be considered alongside the merits of the case. The appeal would proceed once the deposit was made, and if dismissed earlier, it would be reconsidered on its merits. The court disposed of the writ petition without awarding costs. en-us Thu, 13 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Sep 2011 16:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202114 The High Court modified the tribunal's order, directing the petitioner to deposit Rs.2.5 crores by April 2011 for the appeal hearing, instead of the initial Rs.4 crores. The court emphasized that the financial hardship of the petitioner should be considered alongside the merits of the case. The appeal would proceed once the deposit was made, and if dismissed earlier, it would be reconsidered on its merits. The court disposed of the writ petition without awarding costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 13 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202114