Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.28 seconds)The Central Excise Act, 1944
The State Of Bombay And Another vs The United Motors (India) Ltd. And ... on 30 March, 1953
11. We cannot take this decision as an authority for the proposition put forth by Mr. Nanavati. This decision was rendered in 1953 shown at that time, the Constitution considered the right to property as one of the fundamental right. Moreover, in that case, there was absolutely no option left to the authority concerned to entertain the appeal, without money being deposited. As far as the present case is concerned, Section 35F clearly given power to the Tribunal to dispense with such deposit in a given circumstance. Hence, we are afraid that we cannot accept the contention put forth by Mr. Nanavati.
1