https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179186 The court modified the Tribunal's order, directing the petitioner to deposit a reduced amount and furnish an indemnity bond within a specified period to proceed with the appeal. However, the court rejected the application for an extension of time filed six years later due to the significant delay in compliance, emphasizing the importance of timely adherence to court directives. The petitioner's belated deposit and failure to meet obligations within the prescribed timeframe led to the rejection of the extension request. en-us Thu, 24 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Sep 2018 09:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179186 The court modified the Tribunal's order, directing the petitioner to deposit a reduced amount and furnish an indemnity bond within a specified period to proceed with the appeal. However, the court rejected the application for an extension of time filed six years later due to the significant delay in compliance, emphasizing the importance of timely adherence to court directives. The petitioner's belated deposit and failure to meet obligations within the prescribed timeframe led to the rejection of the extension request. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 24 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179186