FPA-FE-179/MUM/2001 of Shri Darshan Hasmukh Shah v/s The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

Learned counsel for the respondent has pointed out that the order dated 06^th January, 2016 wherein para 4 of the order it is specifically mentioned that earlier the appellant was directed to deposit twenty per cent of the amount of penalty on 22.03.2007 which was challenged before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court and was quashed with the direction to the Tribunal to hear the application for dispensation of the pre-deposit afresh. Counsel for the respondent states that in the said order dated 06^th January, 2016, it was wrongly mentioned that the appeal may be listed. We are totally agree with the learned counsel for the respondent that the application for dispensation of pre-deposit is to be heard afresh.

¶15

FPA-FE-179/MUM/2001

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

List the application of stay for hearing on 05^th July, 2018.

¶18

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶19

(G.C. Mishra) Member New Delhi, 21^st February, 2018

¶20

‘A’

¶21

FPA-FE-179/MUM/2001

¶22

Page 2 of 2

FPA-FE-179/MUM/2001 of Shri Darshan Hasmukh Shah v/s The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-FE-179/MUM/2001 of Shri Darshan Hasmukh Shah v/s The Joint Director Directorate of Enforcement, Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases