TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (8) TMI 97
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it Rs. 2 crores 6 weeks from the said date. 2. It is the case on behalf of the appellant that the appellant being aggrieved by the said order approached the High Court in Writ Petition No.10226 /2009 and by order dated 20-7-09, the Hon'ble High Court refused to interfere in the order passed by this Tribunal directing the deposit of sum of Rs. 2 crores. While recording that the High Court was of the opinion that said direction was issued having holistic view of the matter and direction being reasonable. 3. It is informed across the bar that the appellants have preferred SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 25-7-09, which is yet to come up for hearing on 13-8-09. 4. It is also sought to be contended on behalf of the appellant that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; Sd/ Rakesh Kumar &nb....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p; Sd /- Rakesh Kumar ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd 29-7-09, the matter came up before the Bench consisting of Shri D.N. Panda and Shri Rakesh Kumar, Hon'ble Members of the Tribunal. 7. It is also pertinent to note that the order dated 22-5-09 passed by this Tribunal directing deposit of sum of Rs. 2 crores was subjected to judicial review by the High Court of Delhi and by its order dated 20-7-09, High Court refused to stay the said order with the following observations:- "In so faras order dated 22-5-2009 passed by the Tribunal directing the petitioner to make a pre-deposit of Rs. 2 crores is concerned, in the facts and circumstances of this case, we are not inclined to interfere with the said direction. We find from the impugned order that the Tribunal has taken into consideration....