Prima facie case and interim customs relief balanced against recovery, with partial stay granted on further security compliance.

In stay applications arising from customs demand and penalties, the Tribunal found that the appellants had not established a very strong prima facie case for full waiver of pre-deposit. The record did not clearly show that the vehicle was attached to hotel tourist use from the date of import, and it remained registered as a private vehicle until 2006. Balancing the need to protect the appellant from business loss and preserve the subject matter pending appeal, the Tribunal granted partial interim relief by directing further deposit, keeping the bond and bank guarantee alive, and staying recovery and seizure on compliance.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in the stay applications arising from the customs demand and penalties, the appellants were entitled to waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery during the pendency of the appeal.

Analysis: The appellants were found, at the interim stage, not to have established a very strong prima facie case against the impugned order. The vehicle had remained registered as a private vehicle until 2006 and the record did not clearly show that it had been attached to the hotel for tourist use from the date of import. At the same time, complete confiscation or immediate recovery was declined in order to protect the appellant from loss of business and to preserve the subject matter pending appeal. The Tribunal therefore balanced the competing interests by directing the bond and bank guarantee to be kept alive, requiring a further deposit, and staying recovery and seizure on compliance.

Conclusion: Interim relief was granted in part. Recovery of duty, penalty and redemption fine was stayed, seizure of the vehicle was restrained on compliance, and the appellants were directed to make a further deposit and keep the security alive pending disposal of the appeal.

---