https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101036 In a stay application arising from a penalty for alleged clandestine removal of excisable goods, the Tribunal held that a limited pre-deposit was warranted because the appellants had not shown a strong prima facie case and their claim of financial hardship was not convincingly established. Voluntary payment of duty and the continued functioning of the unit weighed against full waiver. The balance penalty was protected from recovery during the pendency of the appeal once the specified deposit was made. en-us Fri, 11 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:25:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101036 In a stay application arising from a penalty for alleged clandestine removal of excisable goods, the Tribunal held that a limited pre-deposit was warranted because the appellants had not shown a strong prima facie case and their claim of financial hardship was not convincingly established. Voluntary payment of duty and the continued functioning of the unit weighed against full waiver. The balance penalty was protected from recovery during the pendency of the appeal once the specified deposit was made. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 11 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101036