https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43494 Article 226 jurisdiction was available because the Tribunal was not constituted under a law expressly excluding High Court review, and statutory finality of appellate orders did not by itself oust writ jurisdiction. Territorial jurisdiction was also satisfied as the impugned order was passed in Delhi and the respondent authority was located there. On the pre-deposit issue, interlocutory stay orders require a strong prima facie case and hardship before interference; where duty had already been realised along the supply chain, insisting on further deposit was unjustified. The Tribunal's pre-deposit direction was therefore quashed and the appeal was to be heard on merits without further deposit. en-us Tue, 07 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:28:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43494 Article 226 jurisdiction was available because the Tribunal was not constituted under a law expressly excluding High Court review, and statutory finality of appellate orders did not by itself oust writ jurisdiction. Territorial jurisdiction was also satisfied as the impugned order was passed in Delhi and the respondent authority was located there. On the pre-deposit issue, interlocutory stay orders require a strong prima facie case and hardship before interference; where duty had already been realised along the supply chain, insisting on further deposit was unjustified. The Tribunal's pre-deposit direction was therefore quashed and the appeal was to be heard on merits without further deposit. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 07 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43494