1989 (7) TMI 113

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er the proviso to Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The demand made on the petitioner by the first respondent was in a sum of Rs. 76,544.40, as per Ext. P1 Order. The petitioner challenged Ext. P1 order before the second respondent by filing Ext. P2 appeal. It was during the pendency of the said appeal that an application for waiving the requirement of pre-deposit was submitte .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt that an appeal filed under Section 35B has to be disposed of under Section 35C either by confirming or modifying or annulling the order appealed against or by returning the case back to the authority which passed the decision. Non-compliance with the requirement of pre-deposit envisaged in Section 35F will not effect the maintainability of the appeal, as held by this court in the said judgment. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X