https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269105 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD held that the present appellants must provide separate proof of mandatory deposit in their own name, distinct from any deposits made by the main appellants, to comply with Section 35F of the Central Excise Act 1944. The Tribunal emphasized the need for the challan to reflect the name of the appellant filing the appeal, directing the present appellants to submit evidence linking the deposits to their name for the appeals to be considered. Compliance with the mandatory deposit requirement was deemed essential for the appeals to proceed. en-us Mon, 19 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Nov 2016 15:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269105 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD held that the present appellants must provide separate proof of mandatory deposit in their own name, distinct from any deposits made by the main appellants, to comply with Section 35F of the Central Excise Act 1944. The Tribunal emphasized the need for the challan to reflect the name of the appellant filing the appeal, directing the present appellants to submit evidence linking the deposits to their name for the appeals to be considered. Compliance with the mandatory deposit requirement was deemed essential for the appeals to proceed. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 19 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269105