TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (5) TMI 339
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat, Ms. Sangeeta Panicker, R.R. Kumar, S. Chatterjee and Bharat Singhal for the Respondent. ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is heard finally. 3. An appeal preferred against a decree passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Mumbai, is put in issue by filing an appeal before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), Mumbai. On 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2-3-2005, paid as per order of the High Court. 4.Rs. 3,00,00,000 paid on 31-3-2005." 6. According to learned counsel for respondent No. 1 the deposits so made do not amount to compliance with the order of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal. It is pointed out that the first amount of Rs. 1,01,11,000 was pursuant to an offer for one-time-settlement and the deposit relates to a date prior to th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Rs. 1,10,00,000 it is stated that the appellant shall give its consent in writing to liquidate the fixed deposits and appropriate the amount towards payment. As regards, the fourth amount, learned counsel for the appellants states that all the conditions accompanying the payment are withdrawn and the amount may be treated to have been paid unconditionally. 8. We record the statement of learned ....