9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 208X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t sections of the Finance Act, 1994. The Commissioner (Appeals) had directed the appellants to pre-deposit an amount of Rs. 2,00,000 for hearing the appeal. Held that- We find that pre-deposit of Rs. 35,000 is adequate to consider the appeal on merits. In the circumstances we order that the appellants shall make pre-deposit as offered and report compliance to the Commissioner (Appeals) on 27-11-20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rator scheme'. He had also imposed penalties under different sections of the Finance Act, 1994. The Commissioner (Appeals) had directed the appellants to pre-deposit an amount of Rs. 2,00,000 for hearing the appeal. 3. Moving the application for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the adjudged dues, the learned counsel for the appellants submits that the order of the Original authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r (Appeals) had considered the stay application and the appeal together and had not recorded any finding as regards the appellants' financial hardship. At this juncture the learned counsel submits that in their appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), they had explained their financial difficulty and this had been taken into consideration. 5. On a careful consideration of the facts of the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
