https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457386 Under Section 52(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, pre-deposit of the penalty was a mandatory for maintaining an appeal unless dispensation was granted on sufficient cause and undue hardship. Where the appellant failed to comply with the directed 20% deposit despite ample time and also did not appear or seek further relief, the appellate authority was entitled to reject the appeal as not maintainable without examining the merits. The operative effect is that non-compliance with a statutory pre-deposit requirement defeats the appeal itself. en-us Tue, 08 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Sep 2024 15:35:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457386 Under Section 52(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, pre-deposit of the penalty was a mandatory for maintaining an appeal unless dispensation was granted on sufficient cause and undue hardship. Where the appellant failed to comply with the directed 20% deposit despite ample time and also did not appear or seek further relief, the appellate authority was entitled to reject the appeal as not maintainable without examining the merits. The operative effect is that non-compliance with a statutory pre-deposit requirement defeats the appeal itself. Case-Laws FEMA Tue, 08 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457386