https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367533 The Court dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance with pre-deposit requirements under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The petitioner's appeal was rejected for a belated pre-deposit made 7 months after filing, despite being presented on time. The Court emphasized the significance of adhering to prescribed timelines and considered relevant legal precedents. Ultimately, the Court found the Second Respondent's dismissal based on delayed pre-deposit erroneous, upholding the Division Bench's decision and remitting the matter for further consideration in accordance with the law, granting relief to the petitioner and directing timely resolution of the appeal and cross appeal by the Revenue. en-us Fri, 07 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Mar 2020 10:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367533 The Court dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance with pre-deposit requirements under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The petitioner's appeal was rejected for a belated pre-deposit made 7 months after filing, despite being presented on time. The Court emphasized the significance of adhering to prescribed timelines and considered relevant legal precedents. Ultimately, the Court found the Second Respondent's dismissal based on delayed pre-deposit erroneous, upholding the Division Bench's decision and remitting the matter for further consideration in accordance with the law, granting relief to the petitioner and directing timely resolution of the appeal and cross appeal by the Revenue. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367533