https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174715 A writ challenge to a pre-deposit direction under Section 35-F of the Central Excise Act was declined because the petitioner had not raised before the Tribunal the factual plea that its property was attached and it lacked means to make the cash deposit. The High Court refused interference in writ jurisdiction on that basis, but granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the Tribunal with an appropriate application placing that fact on record. The Tribunal was directed to decide such application in accordance with law, and the appeal was protected from dismissal for non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement until then. en-us Mon, 21 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Apr 2017 13:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174715 A writ challenge to a pre-deposit direction under Section 35-F of the Central Excise Act was declined because the petitioner had not raised before the Tribunal the factual plea that its property was attached and it lacked means to make the cash deposit. The High Court refused interference in writ jurisdiction on that basis, but granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the Tribunal with an appropriate application placing that fact on record. The Tribunal was directed to decide such application in accordance with law, and the appeal was protected from dismissal for non-compliance with the pre-deposit requirement until then. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 21 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174715