https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42129 The High Court of Judicature at Madras ruled that an appeal is competent against the impugned order. The petitioner may request discretion to not deposit the amount required by Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 if it causes undue hardship. The writ petition was dismissed, but the impugned order will not be implemented for two weeks to allow the petitioner to pursue the appeal process. en-us Tue, 03 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Jun 2010 12:53:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42129 The High Court of Judicature at Madras ruled that an appeal is competent against the impugned order. The petitioner may request discretion to not deposit the amount required by Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 if it causes undue hardship. The writ petition was dismissed, but the impugned order will not be implemented for two weeks to allow the petitioner to pursue the appeal process. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 03 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42129