Small scale industry exemption dispute, limitation plea and financial hardship justified full waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery.

Denial of small scale industry exemption was prima facie challenged on the ground that the goods carried a brand name belonging to another entity, and the Tribunal material and CBEC circular were treated as supporting that position. A prima facie limitation plea was also noted because the demand covered a long past period and the department had earlier been informed about trademark proceedings. Financial hardship and undue hardship were additionally considered for pre-deposit purposes. On that basis, full waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery were granted pending disposal of the appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in view of the prima facie challenge to denial of small scale industry benefit, the plea of limitation, and financial hardship.

Analysis: The dispute concerned denial of small scale industry exemption on the ground that the goods bore the brand name "CABLE KRAFT". The order recorded that the brand name belonged to another entity and relied on the cited Tribunal decisions and the CBEC circular to treat the appellant's case as prima facie covered. It also noted that the demand related to a period extending from October 1996 to June 2001, while the department had been informed by letter in July 2000 regarding trademark proceedings, supporting a prima facie plea of limitation. Financial stringency and undue hardship were also taken into account for purposes of pre-deposit under the stay provision.

Conclusion: Full waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery was granted pending disposal of the appeal.

---