https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457541 Under the repealed foreign exchange law, the Tribunal lacked any general power of review and could only correct clerical errors, so a recall of its earlier dismissal order was not maintainable. The successor enactment could not be used to enlarge that jurisdiction, and the saving provisions merely continued the old regime for pending proceedings. The appeals also could not be revived because the appellants had not complied with the ordered pre-deposit of the balance penalty; non-compliance could not be converted into a basis for rehearing on merits. The dismissal for want of deposit therefore remained intact. en-us Mon, 05 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Sep 2024 14:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457541 Under the repealed foreign exchange law, the Tribunal lacked any general power of review and could only correct clerical errors, so a recall of its earlier dismissal order was not maintainable. The successor enactment could not be used to enlarge that jurisdiction, and the saving provisions merely continued the old regime for pending proceedings. The appeals also could not be revived because the appellants had not complied with the ordered pre-deposit of the balance penalty; non-compliance could not be converted into a basis for rehearing on merits. The dismissal for want of deposit therefore remained intact. Case-Laws FEMA Mon, 05 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457541