Rule 57F(3) clearance to job workers supported a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery.

Clearances of castings to job workers were treated as falling under Rule 57F(3), and the assessee produced declarations filed under that provision for the relevant period. The demand was based on the premise that Rule 56B procedure had not been followed, but the record indicated that the disputed removals were not under Rule 56B. On that basis, the Tribunal found that the assessee had established a strong prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the duty demand.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee had made out a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of the duty demand arising from clearance of castings to job workers, and whether the benefit claimed under Rule 57F(3) was being wrongly denied on the footing that the procedure under Rule 56B had not been followed.

Analysis: The Tribunal noted that the assessee produced copies of declarations filed under Rule 57F(3) during the relevant period. It further found that the clearances in dispute were made under Rule 57F and not under Rule 56B. Since the demand rested on the premise that Rule 56B procedure had not been followed, the record indicated that the assessee was instead following the procedure under Rule 57F(3) and claiming the benefit of that provision. On that basis, the Tribunal held that a strong prima facie case had been established.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the duty amount.

---