TMI Blog1992 (10) TMI 176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... G.P. Agarwal, Member (J)]. Being aggrieved with the demand of excise duty amounting to Rs. 5,92,766/- and imposition of penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/- by the Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur, the appellants have preferred their captioned appeal. 2. Instead of depositing the said amount of duty and penalty, the appellants also filed their application for dispensation of the mandatory requirem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isposed of finally at the admission stage with the direction that in case the petitioner deposits Rs. 1,50,000/ - in cash and furnishes security other than cash and bank guarantee for Rs. 1,50,000/- to the satisfaction of the Collector, Central Excise, Kanpur, within thirty days from today, the Tribunal shall entertain the appeal and dispose it of on merits. 3. Admittedly the appellants have no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 992, as extracted above, and the present case is not a case where the interlocutory order passed by the Tribunal remained in its domain but it has travelled to the Hon. Allahabad High Court, the learned counsel had no answer. In reply, it was contended by the learned SDR, Smt. Ananya Ray, that under somewhat similar circumstances this Tribunal held in the case of A. K. Industries v. Collector of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1992, as modified by the Hon. High Court of Allahabad, vide its Order dated 18-5-1992. In the case of A. K. Industries, supra, this Tribunal after thrashing out the case law on the point held that, it is true that the Stay Order being in the nature of interlocutory order may be modified if it can be shown that new ground (s) have subsequently emerged, but where the interlocutory so passed does n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
