https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73376 The Tribunal held that the order directing deposit of duty during the appeal was interlocutory and not appealable, as it did not affect the merits of the case but related to a prior deposit. The appellants' argument of a violation of natural justice was dismissed since they did not request a personal hearing as required by law. The judgment emphasized the statutory conditions for appeal rights in excise matters, distinguishing between applications for stay of recovery and waiver of prior deposit. It clarified that interlocutory orders like the impugned one are not subject to appeal, highlighting the need to follow legal procedures and seek appropriate remedies within the statutory framework. en-us Wed, 29 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 May 2011 15:19:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73376 The Tribunal held that the order directing deposit of duty during the appeal was interlocutory and not appealable, as it did not affect the merits of the case but related to a prior deposit. The appellants' argument of a violation of natural justice was dismissed since they did not request a personal hearing as required by law. The judgment emphasized the statutory conditions for appeal rights in excise matters, distinguishing between applications for stay of recovery and waiver of prior deposit. It clarified that interlocutory orders like the impugned one are not subject to appeal, highlighting the need to follow legal procedures and seek appropriate remedies within the statutory framework. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 29 Jul 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73376