Exemption dispute and financial hardship justified interim waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending final hearing.

Interim protection was granted in an exemption dispute arising from denial of duty relief on removal of newsprint to a depot. The CESTAT noted that the amended notification did not expressly require direct removal from the factory to the buyer's premises, so the appellant had an arguable case on merits. It also found financial hardship, including heavy losses and BIFR registration, supporting relief. On that basis, waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery were granted pending final hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery should be granted in respect of the duty demand arising from denial of exemption under the relevant notification.

Analysis: The demand turned on whether removal of newsprint from the factory to the depot, rather than direct removal to the buyer, disentitled the appellant to exemption after the amendment of the notification. The order noted that the amended notification did not expressly require direct removal from the factory to the buyer's premises. It also recorded that the appellant had an arguable case on the exemption question and that the record disclosed financial hardship, including heavy losses and registration with BIFR. On that basis, the matter was considered fit for interim protection pending final hearing.

Conclusion: Waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery were granted in favour of the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi: Interim waiver of pre-deposit may be granted where the appellant shows an arguable case on merits and financial hardship.

---