https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772478 CESTAT New Delhi dismissed an appeal where a third party made the required pre-deposit instead of the appellant who faced personal penalty. The Tribunal held that Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944 mandates the appellant personally make pre-deposit, with no provision allowing others to deposit on their behalf. Citing precedent from Sharafat Hussain case upheld by Delhi HC, the Tribunal ruled taxing statutes must be enforced strictly regardless of consequences. While third parties may assist through loans or other arrangements, the statutory requirement for personal pre-deposit by the appellant cannot be circumvented. en-us Fri, 06 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Jun 2025 08:43:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772478 CESTAT New Delhi dismissed an appeal where a third party made the required pre-deposit instead of the appellant who faced personal penalty. The Tribunal held that Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944 mandates the appellant personally make pre-deposit, with no provision allowing others to deposit on their behalf. Citing precedent from Sharafat Hussain case upheld by Delhi HC, the Tribunal ruled taxing statutes must be enforced strictly regardless of consequences. While third parties may assist through loans or other arrangements, the statutory requirement for personal pre-deposit by the appellant cannot be circumvented. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 06 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772478