https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266536 The appeal was dismissed due to the appellant's failure to comply with mandatory deposit requirements under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act 1944. Despite defects in the appeal and the appellant company being in liquidation, no corrective action was taken. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Daman, to claim dues through Form No 66 with the Official Liquidator. The judgment underscored the significance of procedural compliance, including mandatory deposits, and stressed the importance of timely representation in legal proceedings. en-us Thu, 01 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Oct 2015 10:53:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266536 The appeal was dismissed due to the appellant's failure to comply with mandatory deposit requirements under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act 1944. Despite defects in the appeal and the appellant company being in liquidation, no corrective action was taken. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Daman, to claim dues through Form No 66 with the Official Liquidator. The judgment underscored the significance of procedural compliance, including mandatory deposits, and stressed the importance of timely representation in legal proceedings. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 01 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266536