https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417603 The judgment addressed the non-compliance of the mandatory pre-deposit provision under section 35F of the Central Excise Act, leading to the dismissal of the appellant's appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals). Despite subsequent compliance by the appellant and the impact of the Corona Pandemic, the Commissioner failed to reconsider the appeal. The court emphasized the mandatory nature of pre-deposit but stressed the importance of procedural fairness. Consequently, the matter was remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh adjudication to uphold principles of natural justice. en-us Wed, 05 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Jan 2022 09:01:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417603 The judgment addressed the non-compliance of the mandatory pre-deposit provision under section 35F of the Central Excise Act, leading to the dismissal of the appellant's appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals). Despite subsequent compliance by the appellant and the impact of the Corona Pandemic, the Commissioner failed to reconsider the appeal. The court emphasized the mandatory nature of pre-deposit but stressed the importance of procedural fairness. Consequently, the matter was remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh adjudication to uphold principles of natural justice. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 05 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417603