https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116247 The proposed recovery mechanism in a Finance Bill did not affect the Tribunal's power to insist on a pre-deposit under the Central Excise Act. Because the Bill had not yet become law, it could not justify modification of an existing stay order or displace the pre-deposit direction in the pending matter. The Tribunal also noted that the direction did not require payment of the full duty demand. The modification request was rejected, while the time for compliance with the pre-deposit requirement was extended. en-us Tue, 26 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Jun 2012 12:31:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116247 The proposed recovery mechanism in a Finance Bill did not affect the Tribunal's power to insist on a pre-deposit under the Central Excise Act. Because the Bill had not yet become law, it could not justify modification of an existing stay order or displace the pre-deposit direction in the pending matter. The Tribunal also noted that the direction did not require payment of the full duty demand. The modification request was rejected, while the time for compliance with the pre-deposit requirement was extended. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 26 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116247