Strong prima facie case justifies waiver of penalty pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending appeal.

Where the appellant established a strong prima facie case that the imported goods were lawfully cleared and the only dispute concerned alleged absence of MRP stickers, CESTAT granted waiver of the entire pre-deposit of penalty. The tribunal accepted that the seized goods were not shown to differ from the imported goods and that no effective enquiry had been made from the importers, and it stayed recovery of the penalty pending disposal of the appeal. No pre-deposit was required at the hearing stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to waiver of pre-deposit of the penalty amount and stay of recovery pending disposal of the appeal.

Analysis: The goods were stated to have been lawfully imported and cleared under proper documents, and the dispute arose only on the allegation that the goods did not bear MRP stickers as required by the cited notification. The appellant also asserted that the seized goods were not shown to be different from the imported goods and that no effective enquiry had been made from the importers. On these facts, the appellant was found to have made out a strong prima facie case.

Conclusion: Waiver of the entire pre-deposit of penalty was granted and the stay petition was allowed.

Final Conclusion: Recovery of the penalty was stayed during the pendency of the appeal, and no pre-deposit was required at the stage of hearing.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the appellant establishes a strong prima facie case, pre-deposit of the disputed penalty may be waived and stay of recovery granted pending appeal.

---