<?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>1997 (5) TMI 60 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44764</link>
    <description>The Tribunal&#039;s power under Section 35F to require a pre-deposit includes discretion to waive the whole or part of the amount, or impose conditions, according to the facts of each case. That discretion must be exercised on sound legal principles, including prima facie merits, undue hardship, and balance of equities, and writ interference under Article 226 is warranted only if the discretion is illegal or based on improper principles. On the facts, the Tribunal had considered the arguable nature of the appeals and the competing interests of the parties and revenue, so the partial pre-deposit orders were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Jul 2010 16:38:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=83293" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (5) TMI 60 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44764</link>
      <description>The Tribunal&#039;s power under Section 35F to require a pre-deposit includes discretion to waive the whole or part of the amount, or impose conditions, according to the facts of each case. That discretion must be exercised on sound legal principles, including prima facie merits, undue hardship, and balance of equities, and writ interference under Article 226 is warranted only if the discretion is illegal or based on improper principles. On the facts, the Tribunal had considered the arguable nature of the appeals and the competing interests of the parties and revenue, so the partial pre-deposit orders were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44764</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>