https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51967 Amounts payable under Rule 57CC were treated as not constituting duty, so the pre-deposit requirement under Section 35F did not apply. The clarification relied on a Board circular, and the earlier stay order was explained on the basis that the reference to the amount related only to the penalty imposed on the assessee, not to duty liability. On that footing, the waiver of deposit issue was treated as academic once payment was not pressed, and the stay order was clarified accordingly. en-us Mon, 05 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Sep 2010 15:15:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51967 Amounts payable under Rule 57CC were treated as not constituting duty, so the pre-deposit requirement under Section 35F did not apply. The clarification relied on a Board circular, and the earlier stay order was explained on the basis that the reference to the amount related only to the penalty imposed on the assessee, not to duty liability. On that footing, the waiver of deposit issue was treated as academic once payment was not pressed, and the stay order was clarified accordingly. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 05 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51967