https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45117 The court upheld the rejection of the appeal by the first respondent, emphasizing compliance with Section 35F for appeal rights. It ruled that failure to deposit duty demanded or penalty levied impacts the entitlement to appeal, highlighting the provision's flexibility. The court dismissed the petitioner's argument on the first respondent's authority to issue a conditional order during the stay petition, noting the petitioner's prior willingness to comply with excise duty payment. Consequently, the court found the petitioner not entitled to relief, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition. en-us Fri, 27 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Jul 2010 14:12:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45117 The court upheld the rejection of the appeal by the first respondent, emphasizing compliance with Section 35F for appeal rights. It ruled that failure to deposit duty demanded or penalty levied impacts the entitlement to appeal, highlighting the provision's flexibility. The court dismissed the petitioner's argument on the first respondent's authority to issue a conditional order during the stay petition, noting the petitioner's prior willingness to comply with excise duty payment. Consequently, the court found the petitioner not entitled to relief, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45117