Pre-deposit waiver in excise appeals denied where clandestine removal and fake invoices undermined any prima facie case.

Complete waiver of pre-deposit was refused in stay applications where the record indicated clandestine removal of excisable goods, use of a dummy company and collection of duty on fake excise invoices. The appellants' failure to reply to the show cause notice and their non-appearance before the Commissioner weakened any prima facie case and showed that the balance of convenience was not in their favour. Partial relief was nevertheless granted by directing deposit of specified amounts and staying recovery of the balance during pendency of the appeals.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants were entitled to complete waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty in the stay applications.

Analysis: The record indicated clandestine removal of excisable goods, use of a dummy company, and collection of duty on the strength of fake excise invoices. The appellants failed to reply to the show cause notice and did not appear for hearing before the Commissioner. In these circumstances, no prima facie case for total waiver was made out, and the balance of convenience was not in favour of the appellants.

Conclusion: Complete waiver of pre-deposit was refused, but partial relief was granted by directing deposit of specified amounts and waiving recovery of the balance during pendency of the appeals.

Ratio Decidendi: Total waiver of pre-deposit is not justified where the record shows clandestine clearance and fraudulent evasion and the appellants fail to establish a prima facie case and balance of convenience.

---