https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118604 The Appellate Tribunal ruled against the appellants in a case concerning demands for differential duty for the calendar years 2001 and 2003. Despite the appellants' claims for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery, the Tribunal found no prima facie case against the duty demands. While acknowledging the lack of demonstrated financial hardships, the Tribunal directed the appellants to pre-deposit 50% of the duty amounts within a specified timeline. The Tribunal also rejected the appellants' arguments for abatement of discounts and turnover tax on an equalized basis, citing inconsistencies and insufficient supporting evidence. en-us Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Jul 2012 14:33:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118604 The Appellate Tribunal ruled against the appellants in a case concerning demands for differential duty for the calendar years 2001 and 2003. Despite the appellants' claims for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery, the Tribunal found no prima facie case against the duty demands. While acknowledging the lack of demonstrated financial hardships, the Tribunal directed the appellants to pre-deposit 50% of the duty amounts within a specified timeline. The Tribunal also rejected the appellants' arguments for abatement of discounts and turnover tax on an equalized basis, citing inconsistencies and insufficient supporting evidence. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118604