https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247199 The High Court directed that the demands and penalties imposed by the Commissioner of Central Excise on the petitioner for exceeding the betel nut content threshold in their product marketed as "Chutki" shall remain stayed pending the appeal before CESTAT. The petitioner can challenge the order-in-original under section 35 B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and file for a waiver of pre-deposit under section 35 F. The Court also noted the absence of a test report from Sri Ram Institute of Industrial Research, suggesting the petitioner can request this report during the appeal process for further review. en-us Wed, 27 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 May 2014 12:02:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247199 The High Court directed that the demands and penalties imposed by the Commissioner of Central Excise on the petitioner for exceeding the betel nut content threshold in their product marketed as "Chutki" shall remain stayed pending the appeal before CESTAT. The petitioner can challenge the order-in-original under section 35 B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and file for a waiver of pre-deposit under section 35 F. The Court also noted the absence of a test report from Sri Ram Institute of Industrial Research, suggesting the petitioner can request this report during the appeal process for further review. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247199