<?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>1990 (3) TMI 75 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42759</link>
    <description>Dismissal of a stay application without hearing the appellant can vitiate the subsequent dismissal of the appeal for non-compliance with a pre-deposit condition. Where part of the tax demand is admitted, restoration of the appeal may be directed on a fair condition requiring deposit of the undisputed amount within the time granted. Stay can continue for the balance demand, and the appeal may be revived once the deposit condition is satisfied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 11:08:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=81288" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (3) TMI 75 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42759</link>
      <description>Dismissal of a stay application without hearing the appellant can vitiate the subsequent dismissal of the appeal for non-compliance with a pre-deposit condition. Where part of the tax demand is admitted, restoration of the appeal may be directed on a fair condition requiring deposit of the undisputed amount within the time granted. Stay can continue for the balance demand, and the appeal may be revived once the deposit condition is satisfied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42759</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>