https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44004 In writ review of a Tribunal's conditional order on statutory pre-deposit, interference is justified only where the Tribunal failed to consider relevant hardship factors or acted perversely. The Court held that the Tribunal need not decide the underlying excise merits, including limitation or marketability, at the pre-deposit stage, and that a brief order showing application of mind to hardship and revenue interests was sufficient. However, the Court also found that the financial condition could be further relaxed to better balance justice, so the cash deposit was reduced while the bank guarantee for the balance was retained. en-us Fri, 24 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Jun 2010 13:49:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44004 In writ review of a Tribunal's conditional order on statutory pre-deposit, interference is justified only where the Tribunal failed to consider relevant hardship factors or acted perversely. The Court held that the Tribunal need not decide the underlying excise merits, including limitation or marketability, at the pre-deposit stage, and that a brief order showing application of mind to hardship and revenue interests was sufficient. However, the Court also found that the financial condition could be further relaxed to better balance justice, so the cash deposit was reduced while the bank guarantee for the balance was retained. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 24 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44004