<?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>2020 (9) TMI 97 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397978</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court recalled its earlier cost order after counsel explained that court fee could not be deposited within the time granted because of lockdown-related non-availability. The appellant was given two weeks to complete the required compliance, and the direction to pay costs in default of payment within four weeks was withdrawn. The order was thus modified on the basis of the stated administrative difficulty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2026 16:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=621324" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (9) TMI 97 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397978</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court recalled its earlier cost order after counsel explained that court fee could not be deposited within the time granted because of lockdown-related non-availability. The appellant was given two weeks to complete the required compliance, and the direction to pay costs in default of payment within four weeks was withdrawn. The order was thus modified on the basis of the stated administrative difficulty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397978</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>