https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47881 Article 226 review of a tribunal's pre-deposit direction is supervisory, not appellate, so interference lies only if the order is perverse, unsupported by evidence, contrary to law, or breaches natural justice. The tribunal had heard the parties, considered the material, and exercised discretion in fixing the deposit, which was below 10% of the penalty and was regarded as reasonable in light of serious allegations of clandestine excise evasion. No interference was warranted and the challenge failed. en-us Fri, 07 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Jul 2010 13:17:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47881 Article 226 review of a tribunal's pre-deposit direction is supervisory, not appellate, so interference lies only if the order is perverse, unsupported by evidence, contrary to law, or breaches natural justice. The tribunal had heard the parties, considered the material, and exercised discretion in fixing the deposit, which was below 10% of the penalty and was regarded as reasonable in light of serious allegations of clandestine excise evasion. No interference was warranted and the challenge failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47881