https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89255 The Tribunal refused waiver of pre-deposit and interim stay because the appellant had remained inactive for years without seeking stay or depositing the disputed duty, treating the delay as an unfair procedural benefit. It directed deposit of the duty amount by the stated deadline, either in one or two instalments, and warned that non-compliance would expose both appeals to dismissal without further notice. On the penalty issues, it dispensed with the penalties in one appeal only on condition that the deposit direction was complied with, while in the other appeal it required deposit of the penalties and applied the same default consequence. en-us Mon, 30 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Sep 2011 14:17:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89255 The Tribunal refused waiver of pre-deposit and interim stay because the appellant had remained inactive for years without seeking stay or depositing the disputed duty, treating the delay as an unfair procedural benefit. It directed deposit of the duty amount by the stated deadline, either in one or two instalments, and warned that non-compliance would expose both appeals to dismissal without further notice. On the penalty issues, it dispensed with the penalties in one appeal only on condition that the deposit direction was complied with, while in the other appeal it required deposit of the penalties and applied the same default consequence. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 30 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89255