https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91851 Conditional stay under section 35F was considered appropriate where the appeal raised an arguable issue on the effect of the non obstante clause in rule 57B and the admissibility of Modvat credit on HSD oil for the relevant period. The Tribunal treated the unresolved treatment of that point by the lower authorities as supporting a prima facie case for interim relief. However, the applicant did not produce sufficient documentary evidence of financial hardship, and the balance of convenience was not accepted in its favour. Conditional relief was therefore granted subject to a pre-deposit within the stipulated time, failing which the appeal could be dismissed. en-us Fri, 11 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Oct 2011 15:05:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91851 Conditional stay under section 35F was considered appropriate where the appeal raised an arguable issue on the effect of the non obstante clause in rule 57B and the admissibility of Modvat credit on HSD oil for the relevant period. The Tribunal treated the unresolved treatment of that point by the lower authorities as supporting a prima facie case for interim relief. However, the applicant did not produce sufficient documentary evidence of financial hardship, and the balance of convenience was not accepted in its favour. Conditional relief was therefore granted subject to a pre-deposit within the stipulated time, failing which the appeal could be dismissed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 11 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91851