https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86089 Repeated failure to comply with a statutory pre-deposit condition justified refusal to restore the appeals. The Tribunal noted that the appellants had been given successive opportunities and extensions but did not make the required deposit within time, and they sought unconditional restoration only if the detention order was withdrawn. On those facts, the request to revive the appeals and to stay the detention order was rejected, and the pre-deposit requirement was enforced. en-us Thu, 02 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Aug 2011 11:38:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86089 Repeated failure to comply with a statutory pre-deposit condition justified refusal to restore the appeals. The Tribunal noted that the appellants had been given successive opportunities and extensions but did not make the required deposit within time, and they sought unconditional restoration only if the detention order was withdrawn. On those facts, the request to revive the appeals and to stay the detention order was rejected, and the pre-deposit requirement was enforced. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 02 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86089