<?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>2019 (12) TMI 221 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389338</link>
    <description>Section 21 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 treats pre-deposit as a condition precedent to entertainment of an appeal: the appellant must deposit fifty per cent of the debt determined by the DRT, and the Appellate Tribunal may reduce that amount only to not less than twenty-five per cent. The provision does not authorise a complete waiver. The text also notes that the similar pre-deposit scheme under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act follows the same mandatory model, while authorities under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act are not directly comparable because that provision contains an express undue hardship standard and discretion to dispense with deposit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Dec 2019 11:31:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=596407" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (12) TMI 221 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389338</link>
      <description>Section 21 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 treats pre-deposit as a condition precedent to entertainment of an appeal: the appellant must deposit fifty per cent of the debt determined by the DRT, and the Appellate Tribunal may reduce that amount only to not less than twenty-five per cent. The provision does not authorise a complete waiver. The text also notes that the similar pre-deposit scheme under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act follows the same mandatory model, while authorities under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act are not directly comparable because that provision contains an express undue hardship standard and discretion to dispense with deposit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389338</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>