Service of adjudication order and prima facie case justified refusal to presume delay and waiver of pre-deposit.

In the absence of proof that the adjudication order was served by certified copy, delay in filing the appeal was not presumed and condonation was unnecessary. For interim relief at the pre-deposit stage, the appellant's earlier acquittal on the same facts and doubts about statements recorded in customs custody supported a prima facie case, so pre-deposit of the penalty and recovery were stayed. The appeal was left to proceed on merits.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether there was any delay in filing the appeal so as to require condonation; (ii) Whether pre-deposit of the penalty amount should be waived and recovery stayed under the customs appellate provision.

Issue (i): Whether there was any delay in filing the appeal so as to require condonation.

Analysis: The appeal was filed after the date of the Commissioner's order, but the record did not show service of any certified copy of that order on the appellant. In the absence of proof of service, the appellant's statement that the order was received only later was accepted.

Conclusion: No delay was held to exist and the application for condonation was rejected.

Issue (ii): Whether pre-deposit of the penalty amount should be waived and recovery stayed under the customs appellate provision.

Analysis: For the limited purpose of the pre-deposit stage, the earlier acquittal of the appellant on the same set of facts and the doubt attached to the statements recorded while he was in customs custody were treated as supporting a prima facie case. On that basis, the penalty demand was not required to be secured at that stage.

Conclusion: Waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery were granted for the entire penalty amount.

Final Conclusion: The delay objection failed, but interim relief against pre-deposit and recovery was allowed, leaving the appeal to proceed on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of proof of service of the adjudication order, delay cannot be presumed, and at the stage of Section 129E relief, a prima facie view may justify waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery.

---