https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180061 The appeal was dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai due to the appellant's non-compliance with a pre-deposit order and stay order. The appellant was directed to pre-deposit a specified amount and provide a bank guarantee within a set timeframe, which they failed to do despite being given additional time. The High Court upheld the pre-deposit order, emphasizing the binding nature of the counsel's undertaking on behalf of the appellant. The dismissal of the appeal was based on the appellant's failure to meet the specified pre-deposit requirements within the given timeframe, highlighting the importance of compliance with such orders. en-us Fri, 27 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:19:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180061 The appeal was dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai due to the appellant's non-compliance with a pre-deposit order and stay order. The appellant was directed to pre-deposit a specified amount and provide a bank guarantee within a set timeframe, which they failed to do despite being given additional time. The High Court upheld the pre-deposit order, emphasizing the binding nature of the counsel's undertaking on behalf of the appellant. The dismissal of the appeal was based on the appellant's failure to meet the specified pre-deposit requirements within the given timeframe, highlighting the importance of compliance with such orders. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 27 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180061