https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267177 The Tribunal held that the appellant must comply with the mandatory deposit requirement under the amended Section 35F of the Central Excise Act for the appeal to be entertained. The Tribunal dismissed the stay application, emphasizing the necessity of the deposit post-amendment and directing the appellant to provide proof of deposit within a specified timeframe. Failure to comply would result in the appeal being returned as the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to entertain it without the mandatory deposit. en-us Tue, 06 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Oct 2015 09:44:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267177 The Tribunal held that the appellant must comply with the mandatory deposit requirement under the amended Section 35F of the Central Excise Act for the appeal to be entertained. The Tribunal dismissed the stay application, emphasizing the necessity of the deposit post-amendment and directing the appellant to provide proof of deposit within a specified timeframe. Failure to comply would result in the appeal being returned as the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to entertain it without the mandatory deposit. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 06 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267177