https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114283 An appeal dismissed for failure to comply with a pre-deposit direction could not be restored merely because the Commissioner later passed a subsequent order. The Tribunal had already found no prima facie case, directed deposit within the stipulated time, and rejected modification; the deposit was not made, and the earlier conditional liberty for restoration was also not satisfied. A later departmental order did not nullify the Tribunal's earlier directions or revive an appeal dismissed for default. The appropriate challenge lay before the higher appellate forum, not through restoration on that basis. en-us Thu, 04 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 May 2012 14:11:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114283 An appeal dismissed for failure to comply with a pre-deposit direction could not be restored merely because the Commissioner later passed a subsequent order. The Tribunal had already found no prima facie case, directed deposit within the stipulated time, and rejected modification; the deposit was not made, and the earlier conditional liberty for restoration was also not satisfied. A later departmental order did not nullify the Tribunal's earlier directions or revive an appeal dismissed for default. The appropriate challenge lay before the higher appellate forum, not through restoration on that basis. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 04 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114283