https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244929 CESTAT Chennai declined to modify a stay order requiring pre-deposit, holding that the dispute over whether the imported goods were CFL without choke could not be conclusively determined at the interim stage. The Tribunal noted that the applicable notification and Board circular covered both CFL with choke and without choke, and that resolution depended on examination of the catalogue and other factual material. Relying on the earlier stay order, it found no basis to reduce the pre-deposit, but extended the time for compliance by six weeks. en-us Tue, 03 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Mar 2014 07:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244929 CESTAT Chennai declined to modify a stay order requiring pre-deposit, holding that the dispute over whether the imported goods were CFL without choke could not be conclusively determined at the interim stage. The Tribunal noted that the applicable notification and Board circular covered both CFL with choke and without choke, and that resolution depended on examination of the catalogue and other factual material. Relying on the earlier stay order, it found no basis to reduce the pre-deposit, but extended the time for compliance by six weeks. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 03 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244929