<?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>1987 (2) TMI 68 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41854</link>
    <description>Discretionary waiver or reduction of pre-deposit requires the applicant to establish prima facie substance in the claim and then undue hardship. The Tribunal erred by imposing a 50% pre-deposit without first examining prima facie case, and financial capacity could not be presumed merely from the appellant&#039;s status as a subsidiary concern. The pre-deposit order was set aside, and the appeal was directed to be heard on merits without any pre-condition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Jun 2010 14:32:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80383" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (2) TMI 68 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41854</link>
      <description>Discretionary waiver or reduction of pre-deposit requires the applicant to establish prima facie substance in the claim and then undue hardship. The Tribunal erred by imposing a 50% pre-deposit without first examining prima facie case, and financial capacity could not be presumed merely from the appellant&#039;s status as a subsidiary concern. The pre-deposit order was set aside, and the appeal was directed to be heard on merits without any pre-condition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41854</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>